Assessment of Airway Remodeling Using Endobronchial Ultrasound in Asthma-COPD Overlap

The aim of this study was to evaluate the structural changes of the airways using the endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) in ACO patients compared to severe asthma and COPD patients. The study included 17 patients with ACO, 17 patients with COPD and 33 patients with severe asthma. Detailed clinical data...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of asthma and allergy 2021-01, Vol.14, p.663-674
Hauptverfasser: Górka, Karolina, Gross-Sondej, Iwona, Górka, Jacek, Stachura, Tomasz, Polok, Kamil, Celejewska-Wójcik, Natalia, Mikrut, Sławomir, Andrychiewicz, Anna, Sładek, Krzysztof, Soja, Jerzy
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The aim of this study was to evaluate the structural changes of the airways using the endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) in ACO patients compared to severe asthma and COPD patients. The study included 17 patients with ACO, 17 patients with COPD and 33 patients with severe asthma. Detailed clinical data were obtained from all participants. Basic laboratory tests were performed, including measurement of eosinophil counts in blood and serum immunoglobulin E (IgE) concentrations. All patients underwent spirometry and bronchoscopy with EBUS (a 20‑MHz ultrasound probe) to measure the total thicknesses of the bronchial walls and their particular layers in segmental bronchi of the right lower lobe. EBUS allows to distinguish five layers of the bronchial wall. Layer 1 (L ) and layer 2 (L ) were analyzed separately, while the outer layers (layers 3-5 [L ]) that correspond to cartilage were assessed together. In patients with ACO the thicknesses of the L and L layers, which are mainly responsible for remodeling, were significantly greater than in patients with COPD and significantly smaller than in patients with severe asthma (median L = 0.17 mm vs 0.16 mm vs 0.18 mm,
ISSN:1178-6965
1178-6965
DOI:10.2147/JAA.S306421