Risk factors for disease-related deterioration following diagnostic bronchoalveolar lavage procedures in diffuse lung disease: a case-control study

Abstract

Background Although the risk factors for diagnostic bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL)-induced acute exacerbations in patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have been previously reported, no study has assessed these in patients with non-IPF. We aimed to identify the risk factors for BAL-induced disease deterioration (BAL-DD) in all types of diffuse lung disease. Methods Patients with diffuse lung disease who underwent BAL at our hospital from April 2012 to November 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The patient information, laboratory data, radiological findings, and BAL fluid analysis results in patients who developed BAL-DDs were compared with those in patients who did not. Results BAL-DDs occurred in 14 (3.3%) of the 429 patients included the study. The BAL-DD group had a significantly poorer performance status, higher C-reactive protein level, lower partial pressure of oxygen in the arterial blood at rest, greater proportion of desaturation on exertion and cases having followed a progressive clinical course before BAL, and more extensive consolidation and ground-glass opacity on chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) than the non-BAL-DD group. A high total cell concentration and an increased number of eosinophils in the BAL fluid were more frequently found in patients with BAL-DD than in those without. Conclusions Patients with decreased physical activity level, increased level of inflammatory markers, low oxygenation status, and extensive lung involvements on chest HRCT and following a progressive clinical course before BAL may be warned of the BAL-DD risk. Elevated eosinophil counts in the BAL fluid could be associated with the triggering of BAL-DDs.

Inhaled particulate matter affects immune responsiveness of human lung phagocytes to mycobacteria

“…Despite these observed changes in select immune responses to mycobacteria between BAL with and without PM loading, the small sample size remains a limitation, and results could be influenced by confounding factors such as the age of study participants, as well as the absence of PM-type characterization and PM quantification for each sample or cell. The difficulty in recruiting individuals for a bronchoscopy to obtain BAL samples limits the (31,32) implementation of multivariable assessment to potentially control selection bias as well as unmatched patient and disease factors. There is evidence that additional confounding factors such as seasonal changes and site of bronchoscopy (e.g., lingula vs. middle lobe) could potentially influence BALC parameters (33).…”