4.8 Review

Long COVID endotheliopathy: hypothesized mechanisms and potential therapeutic approaches

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 132, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI161167

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute/NIH grant [HL148123]
  2. Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Omeros
  3. Angelo Donghia Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

SARS-CoV-2 infected individuals may suffer from a multi-organ disorder known as "long COVID" or post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). The pathophysiology is unknown and there are no standard treatments available. Acute COVID-19 and PASC have different clinical characteristics, with acute COVID-19 being associated with systemic inflammation, hypercoagulability, and comorbidities, while these features are less prominent in PASC. The involvement of microvascular endotheliopathy and autoimmune responses in PASC is suggested, along with the reactivation of latent pathogens and microvascular thrombosis.
SARS-CoV-2???infected individuals may suffer a multi???organ system disorder known as ???long COVID??? or post-acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC). There are no standard treatments, the pathophysiology is unknown, and incidence varies by clinical phenotype. Acute COVID-19 correlates with biomarkers of systemic inflammation, hypercoagulability, and comorbidities that are less prominent in PASC. Macrovessel thrombosis, a hallmark of acute COVID-19, is less frequent in PASC. Female sex at birth is associated with reduced risk for acute COVID-19 progression, but with increased risk of PASC. Persistent microvascular endotheliopathy associated with cryptic SARS-CoV-2 tissue reservoirs has been implicated in PASC pathology. Autoantibodies, localized inflammation, and reactivation of latent pathogens may also be involved, potentially leading to microvascular thrombosis, as documented in multiple PASC tissues. Diagnostic assays illuminating possible therapeutic targets are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据