ArticleFrontiers in physiology2025
Interrogating pulmonary diffusing capacity in long COVID: insights from DLCO and DLNO testing.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The lingering respiratory effects of COVID-19, particularly in patients with Long COVID, remain poorly understood, prompting a comprehensive evaluation of lung function in this population. Methods: Simultaneous measurements of diffusion capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO) and nitric oxide (DLNO), chest computed tomography (CT), lung ultrasound and questionnaires were collected in 74 subjects. Participants were categorized into two groups: those that have no lingering symptoms (NS, n = 37) and those still struggling with symptoms after initial infection, the disease known as Long COVID (LC, n = 37). Results: DLCO and DLNO were significantly lower in the LC group compared to the NS group (LC vs. NS, DLCO: 25.94 ± 7.65 vs. 21.71 ± 6.35 mL/min/mmHg, p = 0.009; DLNO: 148.5 ± 35.6 vs. 126.6 ± 32.2 mL/min/mmHg, p = 0.006). Pulmonary capillary blood volume (Vc) was also significantly lower in the LC group (43.38 ± 13.87, 70.79 ± 17.77, p = 0.003; LC vs. NS, respectively). Alveolar volume (VA) is significantly lower in the LC group (LC vs. NS, 5.06 ± 1.17 vs. 5.95 ± 1.16, p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between groups for surface area of the lungs available for gas exchange by resistance to gas transfer across the alveolar-capillary membrane (DM) between groups (LC vs. NS, 208.63 ± 97.3, 223.0 ± 93.47 mL/min/mmHg, p = 0.54). These findings indicate that Vc is the driving factor of decreased DLCO. CT findings and lung ultrasound showed no differences between the two groups for lung fluid (p = 0.525; p = 0.298). Conclusion: These findings suggest that a lack of volume available for perfusion could be problematic for these patients and as such requires further investigation for clinical management of these patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.