Objective To explore the clinical features of microscopic polyangiitis ( MPA )complicated with pulmonary involvement in comparison with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis ( IPF) . Methods Clinical and laboratory data of 27 patients with MPA and 56 patients with IPF in the Drum Tower Hospital from2006 to 2010 were analyzed retrospectively. The differences were compared between the MPA patients with pulmonary fibrosis manifestation ( MPA/PF patients) and those without pulmonary fibrosis manifestation( MPA/NPF patients) , and the IPF patients. Results The differences between the MPA/PF patients and the MPA/NPF patients were rarely found in terms of respiratory symptoms, ANCA positive rate, and multiple organ involvement, but the proportions of suffering severe renal damage and severe pulmonary hypertension in the MPA /PF patients were relatively high ( P lt; 0. 05) . Furthermore, there were significant differences between the MPA/PF patients and the IPF patients in terms of dyspnea, incidence of renal damage, ANCA positive rate, incidence of serious pulmonary hypertension, and multiple organ involvement. The IPF patients were more prone to develop dyspnea while MPA patients were more prone to develop renal damage, high ANCA positive rate, high incidence of serious PAH and multiple organ involvement, such as rush, joint pain,weight loss, fever and gastrointestinal symptoms ( P lt;0. 05) . Conclusions When patients have respiratory symptoms complicated with renal failure, skin damage, fever, and joint pain, the diagnosis of MPA should be considered. For patients who were clinically suspected as interstitial pneumonitis or pulmonary fibrosis,measurement of serumantineutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies and creatinine test are essential for diagnosis.
Objective To improve the diagnosis and treatment of pulmonary infiltration with eosinophilia (PIE). Methods Patients who were diagnosed with PIE in the First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University from January 2004 to December 2013 were recruited and retrospectively analyzed. Data of etiology, clinical manifestation, imaging and pathological features were recorded. Results pulmonary eosinophilic granuloma (PEG) (n=2), eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) (n=7), L?ffler syndrome (n=4), allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA) (n=16), and chronic eosinophilic pneumonia (CEP) (n=19). There were 27 males and 21 females. 47.9% of the PIE patients were diagnosed as asthma and treated with regular treatment but had not been controlled well. PEG was characterized with wheeze and anhelation in clinical manifestations, unelevated blood eosinophil counts and percentage, significant small airway abnormalities in lung function, diffuse pneumonectasis in Chest CT, and appearance of eosinophil cells in alveole. EGPA shows dyspnea and cough in clinical manifestations, as well as other organs function damaged, unelevated blood eosinophil counts and percentage, significant FEV1/FVC and small airway abnormalities in lung function, tree-in-bud in Chest CT, appearance of eosinophilic granuloma outside blood vessels. L?ffler syndrome also showed cough, shorter course of disease, normal lung function and diffusion. ABPA showed wheeze and cough, 31.3% of them with hemoptysis, normal blood eosinophil count, central bronchiectasis in Chest CT. CEP also showed dyspnea and cough. 21.1% of CEP patientshad chest pain, increasing sputum eosinophil percentage compare with blood eosinophil percentage, and small airway abnormalities in lung function. Conclusions Most of PIE patients are diagnosed as asthma but haven’t gotten well controlled under the regular anti-asthmatic treatment. Patients with PIE have increasing eosinophil counts and decreasing lung function. The diagnosis of PIE still depends on clinical manifestation, laboratory test, imaging and pathological examination.