4.6 Article

Factors associated with radiologic progression of non-cystic fibrosis bronchiectasis during long-term follow-up

期刊

RESPIROLOGY
卷 21, 期 6, 页码 1049-1054

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/resp.12768

关键词

Bhalla score; body mass index; bronchiectasis; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; radiologic progression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and objectiveNon-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis is a chronic airway inflammatory disease, exhibiting a diverse array of clinical courses. The purpose of this study was to determine the factors that predict radiologic progression of non-CF bronchiectasis during a long-term follow-up. MethodsWe reviewed the electronic medical records that included pulmonary function test data from non-CF bronchiectasis patients, who were older than 18years of age with a follow-up of computerized tomography for more than 5years. The original Bhalla score was used to determine the radiologic severity of non-CF bronchiectasis. ResultsA total of 155 patients (mean age, 59.6years; male, 45.2%) were included for the final analysis. The mean follow up time was 7.111.42 (5-10)years. The baseline Bhalla score was 9.523.14 (4-19), and the change of Bhalla score was 0.55 +/- 1.14 (-2 to 5). The Bhalla score was increased in 56 patients (36.1%) but not in 99 patients (63.9%). The Bhalla score change was significantly associated with the age at diagnosis (p=0.037), body mass index (BMI, p=0.012), chronic infection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (p=0.005) or isolation of nontuberculous mycobacterium (p=0.042) in respiratory specimens. In a multivariate analysis, BMI and isolation of P.aeruginosa were significantly related with the Bhalla score change. ConclusionThe radiologic progression of non-CF bronchiectasis was associated with lower BMI and isolation of P.aeruginosa in respiratory specimens. The radiologic progression of non-CF bronchiectasis was associated with lower BMI and isolation of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in respiratory specimens.

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

4.6
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