AI Article Synopsis

  • Clinical practice guidelines currently distinguish between different radiologic patterns for usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) and fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (fHP), but do not clarify how to use these approaches together for diagnosis in individual patients.
  • A study involving 1,593 patients aimed to integrate these radiologic patterns for diagnosing interstitial lung disease (ILD), revealing that typical UIP patterns strongly correlated with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) diagnoses, while the typical fHP pattern was linked to fHP diagnoses in a significant portion of cases.
  • The findings suggest that an integrated approach is feasible, highlighting that over 5% gas trapping on expiratory imaging is a key diagnostic feature that helps differentiate compatible fHP from other patterns, thus calling

Article Abstract

Background: Clinical practice guidelines separately describe radiologic patterns of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) and fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis (fHP), without direction on whether or how to apply these approaches concurrently within a single patient.

Research Question: How can we integrate guideline-defined radiologic patterns to diagnose interstitial lung disease (ILD) and what are the pitfalls associated with described patterns that require reassessment in future guidelines?

Study Design And Methods: Patients from the Canadian Registry for Pulmonary Fibrosis underwent detailed reevaluation in standardized multidisciplinary discussion. CT scan features were quantified by chest radiologists masked to clinical data, and guideline-defined patterns were assigned. Clinical data then were provided to the radiologist and an ILD clinician, who jointly determined the leading diagnosis.

Results: Clinical-radiologic diagnosis in 1,593 patients was idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) in 26%, fHP in 12%, connective tissue disease-associated ILD (CTD-ILD) in 34%, idiopathic pneumonia with autoimmune features in 12%, and unclassifiable ILD in 10%. Typical and probable UIP patterns corresponded to a diagnosis of IPF in 66% and 57% of patients, respectively. Typical fHP pattern corresponded to an fHP clinical diagnosis in 65% of patients, whereas compatible fHP was nonspecific and associated with CTD-ILD or IPAF in 48% of patients. No pattern ruled out CTD-ILD. Gas trapping affecting > 5% of lung parenchyma on expiratory imaging was an important feature broadly separating compatible and typical fHP from other patterns (sensitivity, 0.77; specificity, 0.91).

Interpretation: An integrated approach to guideline-defined UIP and fHP patterns is feasible and supports > 5% gas trapping as an important branch point. Typical or probable UIP and typical fHP patterns have moderate predictive values for a corresponding diagnosis of IPF and fHP, although occasionally confounded by CTD-ILD; compatible fHP is nonspecific.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2023.07.068DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

radiologic patterns
12
pulmonary fibrosis
12
typical fhp
12
fhp patterns
12
fhp
10
patterns
9
clinical practice
8
practice guidelines
8
idiopathic pulmonary
8
fibrotic hypersensitivity
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!