4.7 Article

Imaging characteristics of pulmonary BCG/TB infection in patients with chronic granulomatous disease

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-16021-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation for the Youth [8210021277]
  2. CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences [2019-I2M-5-002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study assessed the imaging of pulmonary BCG/TB infection in CGD patients. The researchers found that pulmonary BCG infection was more common than TB in CGD patients, but less severe.
In China, tuberculosis (TB) is endemic and the Bacillus Callmette-Guerin (BCG) vaccine is administered to all the newborns, which may lead to BCG infection in patients with chronic granulomatous disease (CGD). Infection of BCG/TB in CGD patients can be fatal and pulmonary is the most affected organ. Our objective was to assess the imaging of pulmonary BCG/TB infection in CGD. We screened 169 CGD patients and identified the patients with pulmonary BCG/TB infection. BCG infection was diagnosis according to the vaccination history, local infection manifestation, acid-fast bacilli staining, specific polymerase chain reaction, and/or spoligotyping. PPD, T-SPOT and acid-fast bacilli staining were used for diagnosis of TB. Totally 58 patients were identified, including TB (n = 7), solely BCG (n = 18), BCG + bacterial (n = 20), and BCG + fungi (n = 13). The onset of BCG disease was much earlier than TB. For those patients only with BCG, lymphadenopathy was the first and most prevalent feature. The most found location was the left axilla, followed by the ipsilateral cervical areas and mediastinal or hilar area. On chest CT, ground-glass opacities, multiple nodules and pulmonary scarring were the most common findings. For TB patients, the pulmonary infections were more serious, including large masses, severe lymphadenopathy, and extensive pulmonary fibrosis. Pulmonary infection of BCG were more common than TB in CGD patients, but much less severe.

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

4.7
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