Ji Eun Lee1, Chin Kook Rhee1, Ji Hwan Lim1, Sang Min Lee2, Young Soo Shim1, Choon-Taek Lee3, Sei Won Lee4. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, The Armed Forces Capital Hospital, Republic of Korea. 2. Division of Pulmonology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, The Armed Forces Capital Hospital, Republic of Korea; Division of Pulmonology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, The Armed Forces Capital Hospital, Republic of Korea; Division of Pulmonology and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea; Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: seiwon@amc.seoul.kr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Acute eosinophilic pneumonia (AEP) is an idiopathic disease characterized by pulmonary eosinophilia. Because the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (Feno) is a surrogate of eosinophilic inflammation, we evaluated the levels, changed treatments, and the diagnostic role of Feno in patients with AEP. METHODS: Between June 2010 and March 2011, we prospectively enrolled patients at the Armed Forces Capital Hospital who had pulmonary infiltrates and a febrile illness and who were clinically suspected to have AEP. We measured Feno twice at the initial visit (pretreatment) and 2 weeks after the initial measurement (posttreatment). RESULTS: A total of 60 subjects were enrolled, and 31 were given a diagnosis of AEP. The pretreatment Feno levels of the patients with AEP were significantly higher than those of the patients without AEP (median, 48 parts per billion [ppb] [range, 10-138] vs 14 ppb [range, 5-41]; P < .001). The cut-off value (23.5 ppb) showed that the maximal area under the receiver operating characteristic curve predicted AEP with a sensitivity of 0.87 and a specificity of 0.83. The posttreatment Feno levels decreased significantly in the patients with AEP, and the levels were similar to the patients without AEP (median, 19 ppb [range, 7-44] vs 14 ppb [range, 1-58]; P = .21) CONCLUSIONS: The Feno level was significantly higher in patients with AEP than in those without AEP. Feno measurement can be used as a diagnostic tool to differentiate patients with AEP from those without AEP. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01152424; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
BACKGROUND: Acute eosinophilic pneumonia (AEP) is an idiopathic disease characterized by pulmonary eosinophilia. Because the fraction of exhaled nitric oxide (Feno) is a surrogate of eosinophilic inflammation, we evaluated the levels, changed treatments, and the diagnostic role of Feno in patients with AEP. METHODS: Between June 2010 and March 2011, we prospectively enrolled patients at the Armed Forces Capital Hospital who had pulmonary infiltrates and a febrile illness and who were clinically suspected to have AEP. We measured Feno twice at the initial visit (pretreatment) and 2 weeks after the initial measurement (posttreatment). RESULTS: A total of 60 subjects were enrolled, and 31 were given a diagnosis of AEP. The pretreatment Feno levels of the patients with AEP were significantly higher than those of the patients without AEP (median, 48 parts per billion [ppb] [range, 10-138] vs 14 ppb [range, 5-41]; P < .001). The cut-off value (23.5 ppb) showed that the maximal area under the receiver operating characteristic curve predicted AEP with a sensitivity of 0.87 and a specificity of 0.83. The posttreatment Feno levels decreased significantly in the patients with AEP, and the levels were similar to the patients without AEP (median, 19 ppb [range, 7-44] vs 14 ppb [range, 1-58]; P = .21) CONCLUSIONS: The Feno level was significantly higher in patients with AEP than in those without AEP. Feno measurement can be used as a diagnostic tool to differentiate patients with AEP from those without AEP. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01152424; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
Authors: Jan Karsten; Katrin Krabbe; Hermann Heinze; Klaus Dalhoff; Torsten Meier; Daniel Drömann Journal: J Clin Monit Comput Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 2.502
Authors: Jina Yeo; Hyun Sun Woo; Sang Min Lee; Yoon Jae Kim; Kwang An Kwon; Dong Kyun Park; Jung Ho Kim; Kyoung Oh Kim; Jun-Won Chung Journal: Intest Res Date: 2017-10-23
Authors: Hwa Yong Shin; Ju Won Choe; Minsuk Kwon; Ju Young Jang; Jae Woo Jung; Jae Chol Choi; Jong Wook Shin; In Won Park; Byoung Whui Choi; Jae Yeol Kim Journal: Allergy Asthma Immunol Res Date: 2013-04-05 Impact factor: 5.764
Authors: Ji Young Park; Taehoon Lee; Hongyeul Lee; Yeon Joo Lee; Jong Sun Park; Young-Jae Cho; Ho Il Yoon; Jae Ho Lee; Choon-Taek Lee Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2014-05-12 Impact factor: 3.317