BackgroundCOPD exacerbations requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission have a major impact on morbidity and mortality. Only 10%–25% of COPD exacerbations are eosinophilic.AimTo assess whether eosinophilic COPD exacerbations have better outcomes than non-eosinophilic COPD exacerbations in the ICU.MethodsThis retrospective observational cohort study was conducted in a thoracic, surgery-level III respiratory ICU of a tertiary teaching hospital for chest diseases from 2013 to 2014. Subjects previously diagnosed with COPD and who were admitted to the ICU with acute respiratory failure were included. Data were collected electronically from the hospital database. Subjects’ characteristics, complete blood count parameters, neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR), delta NLR (admission minus discharge), C-reactive protein (CRP) on admission to and discharge from ICU, length of ICU stay, and mortality were recorded. COPD subjects were grouped according to eosinophil levels (>2% or ≤2%) (group 1, eosinophilic; group 2, non-eosinophilic). These groups were compared with the recorded data.ResultsOver the study period, 647 eligible COPD subjects were enrolled (62 [40.3% female] in group 1 and 585 [33.5% female] in group 2). Group 2 had significantly higher C-reactive protein, neutrophils, NLR, delta NLR, and hemoglobin, but a lower lymphocyte, monocyte, and platelet count than group 1, on admission to and discharge from the ICU. Median (interquartile range) length of ICU stay and mortality in the ICU in groups 1 and 2 were 4 days (2–7 days) vs 6 days (3–9 days) (P<0.002), and 12.9% vs 24.9% (P<0.034), respectively.ConclusionCOPD exacerbations with acute respiratory failure requiring ICU admission had a better outcome with a peripheral eosinophil level >2%. NLR and peripheral eosinophilia may be helpful indicators for steroid and antibiotic management.

AimIncreased dyspnea, sputum volume, and purulence are subjective symptoms in COPD patients. To diagnose COPD exacerbations with chronic respiratory failure (CRF) and to assess the requirement for antibiotic treatment, physicians require more objective criteria. We aimed to investigate whether neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) can be used as an infectious exacerbation marker in COPD patients with CRF.Patients and methodsThis retrospective cross-sectional study was performed in the intensive care outpatient clinic of a tertiary training hospital between 2014 and 2015. Patients admitted with CRF due to COPD and who had complete blood count (CBC) results were enrolled. CBC results and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were obtained from the hospital online database. The “modified exacerbation model (MEM)” was defined as follows: exacerbation A, leukocytes ≥12,000/mm3, CRP >10 mg/dL; exacerbation B, leukocytes ≥10,000/mm3, CRP >10 mg/dL; exacerbation C, leukocytes ≥10,000/mm3, CRP >8 mg/dL; exacerbation D, leukocytes ≥10,000/mm3, CRP >5 mg/dL. The cutoff value of NLR was defined for each model. Patients were split into two groups based on the NLR cutoff value according to the “NLR exacerbation model” and further subgrouped according to peripheral eosinophil percentage (eosinophils ≥2% and <2%) and compared with the MEM.ResultsA total of 1,066 COPD patients (430 females, 40.3%), with a mean age of 66±13 years, were included. A NLR cutoff value of 3.54 (NLR ≥3.54, n=366, 34%) showed the highest sensitivity and specificity for model A (78%, 69%), model B (63%, 71%), model C (61%, 72%), and model D (58%, 72%). Peripheral eosinophilia (PE ≥2%) was present in 48 patients (4.5%). The ratio of patients with PE <2% in the NLR ≥3.54 group was significantly higher in the MEM (P<0.001).ConclusionThe NLR presents an attractive option as an exacerbation marker in COPD patients with CRF due to its simplicity and cost-effectiveness. In COPD patients with CRF, where the NLR is ≥3.54, PE levels are <2%, and subjective symptoms are present, antibiotic treatment should be considered.

Atopy can increase the risk of CM allergy. However, skin tests with CMs may be inefficient, unnecessary, and time-consuming, except in cases with a history of CM allergy. Premedication protocols appear to be beneficial in patients with a history of CM allergy and cannot be recommended for patients with well-controlled asthma, rhinitis, atopic dermatitis or history of drug allergy.