Archivos De Bronconeumologia最新文献

Introduction: Blood eosinophil counts (BEC) have been related to the severity of bronchiectasis and its response to inhaled corticosteroids. However, only the baseline BEC has been used to assess this relationship and it is known that BEC could change over time. The objective of this study is to analyse the association of persistent eosinophilia or eosinopenia with outcomes in bronchiectasis.

Methods: Multicentre, prospective and observational study from 43 centres in Spain derived from the Spanish Bronchiectasis Registry (RIBRON). Asthma and anti-eosinophil treatments were excluded. Patients with at least two yearly BEC measures (including the baseline measure) were included. Persistent eosinophilia (at least 300cells/μL) or persistent eosinopenia (less than 100cells/μL) were defined as the persistence in the same eosinophil group after three yearly measures (being the baseline the first measure).

Results: Five hundred two patients with at least three BEC measures were included; 24.5% and 16.6% presented baseline eosinophilia or eosinopenia, respectively. Of these, 57.7% and 56.6% presented persistent eosinophilia and eosinopenia, respectively. Patients with persistent eosinophilia presented greater severity and a higher number/greater severity of exacerbations than those with non-persistent eosinophilia and those with persistent or non-persistent eosinopenia. Finally, patients with non-persistent eosinopenia presented more severity and a higher number/greater severity of exacerbations than those with non-persistent eosinophilia.

Conclusion: When only the baseline BEC was taken into account, patients with eosinopenia presented greater severity than those with eosinophilia. However, patients with persistent eosinophilia presented greater severity than those with persistent eosinopenia. Monitoring the BEC seems to be important in bronchiectasis.

Backcround: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by high morbidity and mortality, with physical inactivity being a major contributor to poor outcomes. This study aims to identify subgroups of inactive COPD patients by analyzing reported barriers to physical activity and the perceived impact of inactivity on their disease.

Methods: In 91 consecutive stable COPD patients, physical activity was measured using a SenseWear armband and the SAQ-COPD questionnaire, to define inactivity as a physical activity level <1.69. Clinical and functional assessment included measurement of lung volumes, diffusing capacity, muscle strength, six-minute walk test and progressive cardiorespiratory exercise test. Cluster analysis was performed based on patients' responses to the profile and impact sections of SAQ-COPD questionnaire.

Results: In 70 inactive COPD patients, three distinct clusters were identified: Cluster 1 showed significant functional limitations, particularly dyspnea and leg fatigue, alongside worse exercise tolerance and dynamic hyperinflation. Cluster 2 displayed few functional limitations but reported a lack of interest in physical activity as the primary reason for inactivity, with poorer sleep quality observed. Cluster 3 exhibited a high perceived impact of inactivity despite reporting fewer physical limitations, with psychological factors such as fear and discouragement acting as primary barriers. Factor analysis revealed two principal components: perceived impact of inactivity and limiting factors for exercise.

Conclusion: These findings highlight the heterogeneity among inactive COPD patients and emphasize the need for tailored interventions targeting both physical and psychological barriers. SAQ-COPD questionnaire may be a useful instrument for this individualized assessment of inactive COPD patients.