Rationale Several Western studies have reported that participants with preserved ratio impaired spirometry (PRISm) have higher risks of airflow limitation (AFL) and death. However, evidence in East Asian populations is limited. Objectives To investigate the relationship between PRISm and the risks of death and incident AFL in a Japanese population. Methods A total of 3,032 community-dwelling Japanese participants aged ⩾40 years were seen in follow-up for a median of 5.3 years by annual spirometry examinations. Participants were classified into lung function categories at baseline as follows: normal spirometry (FEV 1 /FVC ⩾0.70 and FEV 1 ⩾80% predicted), PRISm (⩾0.70 and <80%), AFL Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 1 (<0.70 and ⩾80%), and AFL Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease 2–4 (<0.70 and <80%). Hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% confidence intervals were computed using a Cox proportional hazards model. Measurements and Main Results During the follow-up period, 131 participants died, 22 of whom died of cardiovascular disease, and 218 participants developed AFL. When examining the prognosis of each baseline lung function category, participants with PRISm had higher risks of all-cause death (HR, 2.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.35–3.59) and cardiovascular death (HR, 4.07; 1.07–15.42) than those with normal spirometry after adjusting for confounders. Moreover, the multivariable-adjusted risk of incident AFL was greater in participants with PRISm than in those with normal spirometry (HR, 2.48; 1.83–3.36). Conclusions PRISm was associated with higher risks of all-cause and cardiovascular death and a greater risk of the development of AFL in a Japanese community.

BackgroundTo date, only few studies have examined the prognostic factors of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) defined according to the latest criteria, which excludes healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP). Therefore, we aimed to investigate the factors that affect prognosis, and evaluate the usefulness of existing pneumonia severity scores for predicting the prognosis of CAP.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed patients with CAP, excluding HCAP, who were enrolled prospectively between April 2007 and February 2016. Four patients who used macrolides other than azithromycin (AZM) were excluded. We used age, sex, comorbidities, laboratory findings and antimicrobial therapy as prognostic variables. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality and secondary outcome was ICU admission. We also performed receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)/American Thoracic Society (ATS) severe criteria, CURB-65 and A-DROP pneumonia severity scores.ResultsAmong 1834 CAP patients, mean age was 73.5 ± 14.3 years; 1281 (69.8%) were men; and 30-day mortality was 6.7% (122/1834). In total, 1830 patients were analyzed. Multivariate analysis identified age [Odds Ratio (OR): 1.04, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 1.02–1.07], chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) [OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.13–2.76], malignancy (OR: 2.25, 95% CI: 1.25–4.06), body temperature (OR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.67–0.99), respiratory rate (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01–1.07), PaO2/FiO2 ≤ 250 (OR: 3.15, 95% CI: 1.93–5.14), Alb (OR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.19–0.39), BUN (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 1.00–1.02), and mechanical ventilation (OR: 2.99, 95% CI: 1.75–5.12) as prognostic factors. AZM and β-lactam combination therapy significantly reduced 30-day mortality (OR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26–0.97). Areas under the curve of PSI, IDSA/ATS severe criteria, CURB-65 and A-DROP were 0.759, 0.746, 0.754 and 0.764, respectively.ConclusionsIncreasing age, presence of COPD and malignancy as comorbidities, hypothermia, tachypnea, PaO2/FiO2 ratio ≤250 mmHg, low Alb level, high BUN level and mechanical ventilatory support predict a worse prognosis; AZM combination therapy should be considered for CAP, excluding HCAP. All four pneumonia severity scores are useful for assessing the severity of CAP defined by the latest criteria.Trial registrationUMIN-CTR UMIN000004353. Registered 7 October 2010. Retrospectively registered.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12890-017-0424-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

BackgroundBecause of a limited number of reports, we aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with Legionella pneumonia due to non-Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 and the diagnostic usefulness of the six-point scoring system for such patients compared with patients with pneumonia caused by L. pneumophila serogroup 1.MethodsWe retrospectively analysed patients diagnosed with Legionella pneumonia due to non-L. pneumophila serogroup 1 between March 2001 and June 2016. We examined the clinical characteristics, including symptoms, laboratory findings, radiologic findings, pneumonia severity, initial treatment and prognosis. We also calculated scores using the six-point scoring system in these patients. Furthermore, we compared the clinical characteristics and six-point scores between non-L. pneumophila serogroup 1 patients and L. pneumophila serogroup 1 patients among hospitalized community-acquired pneumonia patients enrolled prospectively between October 2010 and July 2016.ResultsEleven patients had pneumonia due to non-L. pneumophila serogroup 1; their median age was 66 years and 8 patients (72.7%) were male. The most common pathogen was L. pneumophila serogroup 3 (6/11), followed by L. pneumophila serogroup 9 (3/11), L. pneumophila serogroup 6 (1/11) and L. longbeachae (1/11). Non-specific symptoms, such as fever and cough, were common. Six patients (54.5%) had liver enzyme elevation, but no patient developed hyponatraemia at <130 mEq/L. Nine patients (81.8%) showed lobar pneumonia and 7 patients (63.6%) manifested with consolidation and ground-glass opacity. Patients with mild to moderate severity comprised 10 (90.9%) by CURB-65 and 5 (45.5%) by the Pneumonia Severity Index. Of all patients, 4 were admitted to the intensive care unit and 3 died despite appropriate empiric therapy. The clinical characteristics were not significantly different between non-L. pneumophila serogroup 1 patients and L. pneumophila serogroup 1 patients (n = 23). At a cut-off value of ≥ 2 points, the sensitivity of the six-point scoring system was 54.5% (6/11) for non-L. pneumophila serogroup 1 patients and 95.7% (22/23) for L. pneumophila serogroup 1 patients.ConclusionsCases of non-L. pneumophila serogroup 1 pneumonia varied in severity from mild to severe and the clinical characteristics were often non-specific. The six-point scoring system was not useful in predicting such Legionella pneumonia cases.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12890-017-0559-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.