Miki Mari, Ohara Yuko, Tsujino Kazuyuki, Kawasaki Takahiro, Kuge Tomoki, Yamamoto Yuji, Matsuki Takanori, Miki Keisuke, Kida Hiroshi
Department of Respiratory Medicine, National Hospital Organization Osaka Toneyama Medical Center, Osaka, Japan.
Department of Internal Medicine, Tokushima Prefecture Naruto Hospital, 32 Kotani, Kurosaki, Muya-cho, Naruto, Tokushima, 772-8503, Japan.
Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol. 2021 Nov 18;17(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s13223-021-00624-4.
Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) and chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (CEP) both display peripheral eosinophilia as well as pulmonary infiltration, together described as pulmonary eosinophilia, and differentiation is sometimes problematic. This study therefore examined the distinctions between ABPA with and without CEP-like shadows.
This retrospective cohort study from a single center included 25 outpatients (median age, 65 years) with ABPA diagnosed between April 2015 and March 2019, using criteria proposed by the International Society of Human and Animal Mycology (ISHAM), which focuses on positive specific IgE for Aspergillus fumigatus. Patients were assigned to either the eosinophilic pneumonia (EP) group or Non-EP group, defined according to findings on high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT). The EP group included patients with HRCT findings compatible with CEP; i.e., the presence of peripheral consolidation (p-consolidation) or ground-glass opacities (GGO), with no evidence of high-attenuation mucus. The Non-EP group comprised the remaining patients, who showed classical findings of ABPA such as mucoid impaction. Differences between the groups were analyzed.
Baseline characteristics, frequency of a history of CEP (EP, 50% vs. Non-EP, 26%) and tentative diagnosis of CEP before diagnosis of ABPA (67% vs. 16%) did not differ significantly between groups. Although elevated absolute eosinophil count and Aspergillus-specific immunoglobulin E titers did not differ significantly between groups, the Non-EP group showed a strong positive correlation between these values (R = 0.7878, p = 0.0003). The Non-EP group displayed significantly higher levels of the fungal marker beta-D glucan (median, 11.7 pg/ml; interquartile range, 6.7-18.4 pg/ml) than the EP group (median, 6.6 pg/ml; interquartile range, 5.2-9.3 pg/ml). Both groups exhibited frequent recurrence of shadows on X-rays but no cases in the EP group had progressed to the Non-EP group at the time of relapse.
The ABPA subgroup with imaging findings resembling CEP experienced frequent recurrences, as in typical ABPA. In pulmonary eosinophilia, even if there are no shadows indicating apparent mucous change, the Aspergillus-specific immunoglobulin E level is important in obtaining an accurate diagnosis and in the selection of appropriate therapies for this type of ABPA.
变应性支气管肺曲霉病(ABPA)和慢性嗜酸性粒细胞性肺炎(CEP)均表现为外周血嗜酸性粒细胞增多以及肺部浸润,二者统称为肺嗜酸性粒细胞增多症,有时鉴别诊断存在困难。因此,本研究探讨了伴有和不伴有CEP样阴影的ABPA之间的差异。
本项单中心回顾性队列研究纳入了25例门诊患者(中位年龄65岁),这些患者于2015年4月至2019年3月期间根据国际人类和动物真菌学会(ISHAM)提出的标准诊断为ABPA,该标准重点关注烟曲霉特异性IgE阳性。根据高分辨率计算机断层扫描(HRCT)结果,将患者分为嗜酸性粒细胞性肺炎(EP)组或非EP组。EP组包括HRCT表现符合CEP的患者,即存在外周实变(p-实变)或磨玻璃影(GGO),且无高衰减黏液的证据。非EP组包括其余患者,他们表现出ABPA的典型表现,如黏液嵌塞。分析两组之间的差异。
两组患者的基线特征、CEP病史频率(EP组为50%,非EP组为26%)以及ABPA诊断前CEP的初步诊断率(67%对16%)差异均无统计学意义。虽然两组患者的绝对嗜酸性粒细胞计数升高和曲霉特异性免疫球蛋白E滴度差异无统计学意义,但非EP组中这些值之间呈强正相关(R = 0.7878,p = 0.0003)。非EP组的真菌标志物β-D葡聚糖水平(中位数为11.7 pg/ml;四分位间距为6.7 - 18.4 pg/ml)显著高于EP组(中位数为6.6 pg/ml;四分位间距为5.2 - 9.3 pg/ml)。两组患者X线阴影均频繁复发,但在复发时EP组无病例进展为非EP组。
影像学表现类似于CEP的ABPA亚组与典型ABPA一样,复发频繁。在肺嗜酸性粒细胞增多症中,即使没有表明明显黏液改变的阴影,曲霉特异性免疫球蛋白E水平对于准确诊断以及为这类ABPA选择合适的治疗方法也很重要。