4.7 Article

Distinctive clinical, radiographic, and functional characteristics of patients with sarcoidosis-related pulmonary hypertension

期刊

CHEST
卷 128, 期 3, 页码 1483-1489

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1378/chest.128.3.1483

关键词

chest radiography; echocardiography; oxygen saturation; pulmonary function; pulmonary hypertension; sarcoidosis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Study objective: To differentiate the clinical, radiographic, and physiologic profile in patients with sarcoidosis with and without pulmonary hypertension. Design: Retrospective survey. Setting: Tertiary, care center. Patients: One hundred six patients with sarcoidosis were classified by, two-dimensional echocardiography into two groups: group 1, 54 patients with pulmonary hypertension; group 2, 52 patients without pulmonary, hypertension. Interventions: Patients underwent two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography, chest radiography (CXR), pulmonary function testing, and arterial oxygen saturation determination, and the test results were compared between the two groups. Statistical analysis was performed using independent-sample t test and chi(2)test, as appropriate; p < 0.05 was considered to be significant. Results: Predicted spirometric values and lung diffusing capacity, were significantly lower in patients in group I compared to patients in group 2: FVC, 54% vs 64% (p = 0.0065), FEV1, 47% vs 61% (p = 0.0005), forced expiratory, flow, midexpiratory phase, 35% vs 52% (p = 0.0363), and single-breath diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCOSb), 39% vs 54% (p = 0.0001). Sixty, percent of patients in group I had radiographic Scadding stage 4 sarcoidosis, while no radiographic stage predominated in group 2. Arterial oxygen saturation, need for oxygen supplementation, and degree of desaturation after exercise did not differ between groups. Conclusions: The presence of pulmonary, hypertension in patients with sarcoidosis is associated with higher prevalence of stage 4 sarcoidosis by CXR and lower predicted spirometric and DLCOSb measurements.

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