Rosales-Mayor Edmundo, Polverino Eva, Raguer Laura, Alcaraz Victoria, Gabarrus Albert, Ranzani Otavio, Menendez Rosario, Torres Antoni
Fundació Clínic, IDIBAPS, CIBERES, Servicio de Neumología, Hospital Clinic de Barcelona, Barcelona, España.
Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona, España.
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 6;12(4):e0175171. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175171. eCollection 2017.
Bronchiectasis (BE) is a chronic and heterogeneous respiratory disease that requires a multidimensional scoring system to properly assess severity. The aim of this study was to compare the severity stratification by 2 validated scores (BSI and FACED) in a BE cohort and to determine their predictive capacity for exacerbations and hospitalizations. Moreover, we proposed a modified version of FACED which was created to better predict the risk of exacerbations in clinical practice. We performed a prospective cohort study including BE patients >18 years old with a follow-up period of 1-year. One-hundred eighty-two patients (40% males; mean age 68) were studied. Patients were stratified according to the number of exacerbations during the follow-up, and according to BSI and FACED scores. BSI classified most of our patients as severe 99 (54.4%) or moderate 47 (25.8%), while FACED mainly classified as mild 108 (59.3%) or moderate 61 (33.5%). BSI and FACED showed an area under ROC curve (AUC) for exacerbations of 0.808 and 0.734; and for hospitalizations (due to BE exacerbations) of 0.893 and 0.809, respectively. Subsequently, we modified FACED by adding previous exacerbations (Exa-FACED) and this new score classified patients as mild 48.4%, moderate 34.6% and severe 17.0%, with an improved AUC for exacerbations (0.760) and hospitalizations (0.820). Despite previous validations of BSI and FACED, they classified our patients very differently. As expected, FACED showed poor prognostic capacity for exacerbations. We support the Exa-FACED score to predict the risk future exacerbations for been easy to use in clinical practice.
支气管扩张症(BE)是一种慢性异质性呼吸系统疾病,需要多维评分系统来准确评估严重程度。本研究的目的是比较在一个BE队列中两种经过验证的评分(BSI和FACED)对严重程度的分层情况,并确定它们对病情加重和住院治疗的预测能力。此外,我们提出了FACED的一个修改版本,旨在更好地预测临床实践中病情加重的风险。我们进行了一项前瞻性队列研究,纳入年龄大于18岁的BE患者,随访期为1年。共研究了182例患者(40%为男性;平均年龄68岁)。根据随访期间病情加重的次数以及BSI和FACED评分对患者进行分层。BSI将我们的大多数患者分类为重度99例(54.4%)或中度47例(25.8%),而FACED主要将患者分类为轻度108例(59.3%)或中度61例(33.5%)。BSI和FACED对病情加重的ROC曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.808和0.734;对住院治疗(由于BE病情加重)的AUC分别为0.893和0.809。随后,我们通过加入既往病情加重情况对FACED进行修改(Exa - FACED),这个新评分将患者分类为轻度48.4%、中度34.6%和重度17.0%,对病情加重的AUC提高到0.760,对住院治疗的AUC提高到0.820。尽管之前对BSI和FACED进行了验证,但它们对我们患者的分类差异很大。正如预期的那样,FACED对病情加重的预后能力较差。我们支持使用Exa - FACED评分来预测未来病情加重的风险,因为它在临床实践中易于使用。