Clustering based on clinicophysiologic parameters yielded 4 stable and reproducible clusters that associate with different pathobiological pathways.
Tracheomalacia and tracheobronchomalacia may be primary abnormalities of the large airways or associated with a wide variety of congenital and acquired conditions. The evidence on diagnosis, classification and management is scant. There is no universally accepted classification of severity. Clinical presentation includes early-onset stridor or fixed wheeze, recurrent infections, brassy cough and even near-death attacks, depending on the site and severity of the lesion. Diagnosis is usually made by flexible bronchoscopy in a free-breathing child but may also be shown by other dynamic imaging techniques such as low-contrast volume bronchography, computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. Lung function testing can provide supportive evidence but is not diagnostic. Management may be medical or surgical, depending on the nature and severity of the lesions, but the evidence base for any therapy is limited. While medical options that include bronchodilators, anti-muscarinic agents, mucolytics and antibiotics (as well as treatment of comorbidities and associated conditions) are used, there is currently little evidence for benefit. Chest physiotherapy is commonly prescribed, but the evidence base is poor. When symptoms are severe, surgical options include aortopexy or posterior tracheopexy, tracheal resection of short affected segments, internal stents and external airway splinting. If respiratory support is needed, continuous positive airway pressure is the most commonly used modality either via a face mask or tracheostomy. Parents of children with tracheobronchomalacia report diagnostic delays and anxieties about how to manage their child's condition, and want more information. There is a need for more research to establish an evidence base for malacia. This European Respiratory Society statement provides a review of the current literature to inform future study.
OBJECTIVE-To determine whether interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs) improve the identification of HIV-infected individuals who could benefit from LTBI therapy. DESIGN-Systematic review and meta-analysis.METHODS-We searched multiple databases through May2010 for studies evaluating the performance of the newest commercial IGRAs (QuantiFERON-Gold In-tube [QFT-GIT] and T-SPOT. TB [TSPOT])in HIV-infected individuals. We assessed the quality of all studies included in the review, summarized results in pre-specified sub-groups using forest plots, and where appropriate, calculated pooled estimates using random effects models. RESULTS-The search identified 37 studies that included 5736 HIV-infected individuals. In3 longitudinal studies, the risk of active TB was higher in HIV-infected individuals with positive versus negative IGRA results. However, the risk difference was not statistically significant in the 2 studies that reported IGRA results according to manufacturer-recommended criteria. In persons with active TB(a surrogate reference standard for LTBI), pooled sensitivity estimates were heterogeneous, but higher for TSPOT (72%, 95% CI 62-81%) than for QFT-GIT (61%, 95% CI 41-75%). However, neither IGRA was consistently more sensitive than the tuberculin skin test (TST) in head-to-head comparisons. While TSPOT appeared to be less affected by immunosuppression than QFT-GIT and TST, overall, differences between the three tests were small or inconclusive.CONCLUSIONS-Current evidence suggests that IGRAs perform similarly to the TST at identifying HIV-infected individuals with LTBI. Given that both tests have modest predictive value and sub-optimal sensitivity, the decision to use either test should be based on country guidelines and resource and logistical considerations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.