Clinical characteristics and epidemiology survey of lung transplantation recipients accepting surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic : from area near Hubei Province

  1. Lingxiao Qiu
  2. Shan shan Chen
  3. Cong Wang
  4. Caihong Liu
  5. Huaqi Wang
  6. Xiaoguang Zhao
  7. Zeming Fang
  8. Siyuan Chang
  9. Gaofeng Zhao
  10. Guojun Zhang

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Lung transplantation recipients (LTx) were susceptible to severe acute respiratory syndrome-corona virus-2 (SARS-Cov-2) and suffered a higher mortality risk than healthy subjects. Here we aim to analyze whether it was appropriate or and valuable to maintain lung transplant programs in medical institutions accepting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. In this study, the clinical characteristics, laboratory testing and epidemiology survey results of 10 LTx recipients undergoing allograft lung transplantation surgeries in the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University during the COVID-19 pandemic were collected. A web-based epidemiology questionnaire was used to collect the information of LTx recipients after discharge. Up to now, none of the LTx recipients or their family members get infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the novel coronavirus pandemic. In conclusion, under the premise of taking appropriate preventive measures during hospitalization and after discharge, the lung transplant program can be maintained in the medical institution that accepts patients with COVID-19.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.07.06.20147264: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board Statementnot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    All statistical analyses were conducted on version 26.0 of SPSS software.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    There are several limitations to the current study. Firstly, this is a single-center study. Secondly, the SARS-CoV-2 is not cleared in China and other countries of the world, these LTx recipients still face the risk of infection. Therefore, observation and follow-up are warranted. Furthermore, a larger sample size will help to improve the greater reliability of the data. In conclusion, according to our survey, if the medical institution has sufficient wards, medical staff, appropriate measures of preventing nosocomial infections and also can provide LTx recipients with correct education on the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection, we believe that it is feasible to maintain lung transplant program in severely affected areas during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.07.06.20147264v1 on medRxiv