4.5 Article

Analysis of bronchial biopsies in chronic cough

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
卷 127, 期 -, 页码 40-44

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2017.04.001

关键词

Chronic cough; Bronchial biopsies; Inflammation

资金

  1. Foundation of Visiting Professor in The First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University
  2. Smoking Research Foundation for the Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, Ministry of Education of China
  3. National Institute for Health Research Respiratory Disease Biomedical Research Unit at the Royal Brompton Hospital and Harefield Foundation NHS Trust
  4. Imperial College London
  5. Asthma UK [MRC-Asthma UK Centre, MRC-AsthmaUKCentre] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. Medical Research Council [G1000758B, G1000758] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Chronic cough is commonly associated with asthma, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and postnasal drip, but in a significant proportion, no associated cause can be found. We determined whether examination of bronchial biopsies would be useful in determining the cause associated with chronic cough. Methods: 100 consecutive patients referred to a specialist cough clinic underwent a systematic assessment including a fiberoptic bronchoscopy for bronchial biopsies. Results.: In 38 patients, treatment of associated causes led to amelioration of cough ('explained') and in 62, there was no association or improvement ('idiopathic'). The latter group had a longer duration of cough, a lower FeNO levels and a more sensitive capsaicin cough response, with an increase in basement membrane thickness with no differences in goblet cell hyperplasia and seromucinous hyperplasia, and in lymphocyte, neutrophil and eosinophil counts. The duration of cough was inversely correlated with the degree of neutrophil infiltration. Conclusion: We conclude that pathological examination of bronchial biopsies is unlikely to be useful in the diagnosis of chronic cough in non-smokers. (C) 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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