4.5 Article

Is lymphocytic bronchiolitis a marker of acute rejection? An analysis of 2,697 transbronchial biopsies after lung transplantation

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION
卷 27, 期 10, 页码 1128-1134

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2008.06.014

关键词

-

资金

  1. Copenhagen University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Guidelines for the diagnosis and grading of lymphocytic bronchiolitis (LB) have been available for more than a decade, but agreement is lacking concerning the clinical implications of this histologic finding. Objectives: Study goals were to describe the overall prevalence and incidence of LB in a consecutive cohort of lung transplant recipients and identify, risk factors for the onset, frequency, and severity of LB. Methods: A retrospective analysis was done of 2,697 transbronchial biopsy (TBB) specimens obtained during the first 2 years after transplantation from 299 consecutive patients who underwent transplantation between 1996 and 2006. Results: Full diameter membranous bronchioli Were missing in approximately 30% of TBB specimens. The proportion of patients demonstrating LB, remained constant during follow-up (trend test, p = 0.2). The cumulative incidence of LB (>= B2) was 33%, 53%, 62%, and 68% at 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-months, respectively. Approximately one-quarter and one-half of the patients had a second episode of >= B2 within 3 months and 2-years of transplantation, respectively. Exposure to LB during the first 2 years after transplantation was independently associated with the frequency and/or severity of acute cellular rejection (p < 0.0001). The choice between anti-thymocyte globulin or dactizumab induction did not alter the overall frequency and/or Severity of LB (p = 07). LB grade B2 or higher was associated with increased histologic bronchiolitis obliterans (odds ratio, 3.3, 95% confidence interval, 1.5-6.9, p = 0.001). Conclusions: The frequency and severity of LB was associated with the occurrence and severity of acute cellular rejection.

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

4.5
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