Eosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
VisualWikitext
Sudarshana Datta (talk | contribs)
nocaptcha
3,577 edits
Created page with "_NOTOC__ {{Eosinophilic pneumonia}} {{CMG}}; {{AE}} == Overview == == Diagnostic Study of Choice == === Study of choice === * [Name of the investigation] is the gold standard..."
 
Sudarshana Datta (talk | contribs)
nocaptcha
3,577 edits
No edit summary
 
(5 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
_NOTOC__
__NOTOC__
{{Eosinophilic pneumonia}}
{{Eosinophilic pneumonia}}
{{CMG}}; {{AE}}
{{CMG}} {{AE}} {{MAD}}
== Overview ==
== Overview ==
[[Bronchoalveolar lavage]] (BAL) is the diagnostic study of choice for eosinophilic pneumonia.
== Diagnostic Study of Choice ==
== Diagnostic Study of Choice ==
'''Bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage'''
* [[Bronchoalveolar lavage]] (BAL) is performed in the majority of patients to exclude [[infection]], [[hemorrhage]], or [[malignancy]].<ref name="pmid8181338">{{cite journal| author=Hayakawa H, Sato A, Toyoshima M, Imokawa S, Taniguchi M| title=A clinical study of idiopathic eosinophilic pneumonia. | journal=Chest | year= 1994 | volume= 105 | issue= 5 | pages= 1462-6 | pmid=8181338 | doi= | pmc= | url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&tool=sumsearch.org/cite&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks&id=8181338  }}</ref>
* The BAL is performed using a sequential instillation and recovery of 50 to 60 mL aliquots in an area of radiographic opacity.
* In acute pneumonia, the BAL fluid typically shows a very high proportion (>25 percent) and total number of [[eosinophils]].<ref name="pmid83396392">{{cite journal| author=Ogawa H, Fujimura M, Matsuda T, Nakamura H, Kumabashiri I, Kitagawa S| title=Transient wheeze. Eosinophilic bronchobronchiolitis in acute eosinophilic pneumonia. | journal=Chest | year= 1993 | volume= 104 | issue= 2 | pages= 493-6 | pmid=8339639 | doi= | pmc= | url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&tool=sumsearch.org/cite&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks&id=8339639  }}</ref>
* The median BAL cellularity was 350,000/mm3. BAL [[eosinophilia]] was present in all cases with a median of 38%.
* The proportion of BAL [[lymphocytes]] is approximately 10 to 30 percent and the proportion of BAL [[neutrophils]] is 1 to 16 percent.
* The level of [[eosinophilia]] returns to normal when the illness resolves.


=== Study of choice ===
==References==
* [Name of the investigation] is the gold standard test for the diagnosis of [disease name].
{{Reflist|2}}
* The following result of [gold standard test] is confirmatory of [disease name]:
** Result 1
** Result 2
* The [name of the investigation] should be performed when:
** The patient presented with symptoms/signs 1. 2, 3.
** A positive [test] is detected in the patient.
* [Name of the investigation] is the gold standard test for the diagnosis of [disease name].
* The diagnostic study of choice for [disease name] is [name of the investigation].
* There is no single diagnostic study of choice for the diagnosis of [disease name].
* There is no single diagnostic study of choice for the diagnosis of [disease name], but [disease name] can be diagnosed based on [name of the investigation 1] and [name of the investigation 2].
* [Disease name] is mainly diagnosed based on clinical presentation.
* Investigations:
** Among patients who present with clinical signs of [disease name], the [investigation name] is the most specific test for the diagnosis.
** Among patients who present with clinical signs of [disease name], the [investigation name] is the most sensitive test for diagnosis.
** Among patients who present with clinical signs of [disease name], the [investigation name] is the most efficient test for diagnosis.


==== The comparison of various diagnostic studies for [disease name] ====
{{WH}}
{|
{{WS}}
|- style="background: #4479BA; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center;"
[[Category: (name of the system)]]
! style="background: #4479BA; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center;" | Test
! style="background: #4479BA; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center;" |Sensitivity
! style="background: #4479BA; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center;" |Specificity
|-
! style="background: #696969; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center;" |Test 1
| style="background: #DCDCDC; padding: 5px; text-align: center;" |✔
| style="background: #DCDCDC; padding: 5px; text-align: center;" |...%
|-
! style="background: #696969; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center;" |Test 2
| style="background: #DCDCDC; padding: 5px; text-align: center;" |...%
| style="background: #DCDCDC; padding: 5px; text-align: center;" |✔
|}
<small> ✔= The best test based on the feature </small>
 
===== Diagnostic results =====
The following result of [investigation name] is confirmatory of [disease name]:
* Result 1
* Result 2
 
===== Sequence of Diagnostic Studies =====
The [name of investigation] should be performed when:
* The patient presented with symptoms/signs 1, 2, and 3 as the first step of diagnosis.
* A positive [test] is detected in the patient, to confirm the diagnosis.
 
=== Diagnostic Criteria ===
* Here you should describe the details of the diagnostic criteria.
*Always mention the name of the criteria/definition you are about to list (e.g. modified Duke criteria for the diagnosis of endocarditis / 3rd universal definition of MI) and cite the primary source of where this criteria/definition is found.
*Although not necessary, it is recommended that you include the criteria in a table. Make sure you always cite the source of the content and whether the table has been adapted from another source.
*Be very clear as to the number of criteria (or threshold) that needs to be met out of the total number of criteria.
*Distinguish criteria based on their nature (e.g. clinical criteria / pathological criteria/ imaging criteria) before discussing them in details.
*To view an example (endocarditis diagnostic criteria), click [[Endocarditis diagnosis|here]]
*If relevant, add additional information that might help the reader distinguish various criteria or the evolution of criteria (e.g. original criteria vs. modified criteria).
*You may also add information about the sensitivity and specificity of the criteria, the pre-test probability, and other figures that may help the reader understand how valuable the criteria are clinically.
* [Disease name] is mainly diagnosed based on clinical presentation. There are no established criteria for the diagnosis of [disease name].
* There is no single diagnostic study of choice for [disease name], though [disease name] may be diagnosed based on [name of criteria] established by [...].
 
* The diagnosis of [disease name] is made when at least [number] of the following [number] diagnostic criteria are met: [criterion 1], [criterion 2], [criterion 3], and [criterion 4].
* The diagnosis of [disease name] is based on the [criteria name] criteria, which includes [criterion 1], [criterion 2], and [criterion 3].
 
* [Disease name] may be diagnosed at any time if one or more of the following criteria are met:
** Criteria 1
** Criteria 2
** Criteria 3
 
IF there are clear, established diagnostic criteria:
*The diagnosis of [disease name] is made when at least [number] of the following [number] diagnostic criteria are met: [criterion 1], [criterion 2], [criterion 3], and [criterion 4].
*The diagnosis of [disease name] is based on the [criteria name] criteria, which include [criterion 1], [criterion 2], and [criterion 3].
*The diagnosis of [disease name] is based on the [definition name] definition, which includes [criterion 1], [criterion 2], and [criterion 3].
IF there are no established diagnostic criteria: 
*There are no established criteria for the diagnosis of [disease name].

Latest revision as of 18:15, 29 March 2018

Pneumonia Main Page

Eosinophilic pneumonia Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Eosinophilic pneumonia from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Screening

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

Diagnostic Study of Choice

Diagnostic Criteria

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Chest X Ray

CT

Other Imaging Findings

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Surgery

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case #1

Eosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Eosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Eosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice

CDC onEosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice

Eosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice in the news

Blogs on Eosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice

Directions to Hospitals Treating Eosinophilic pneumonia

Risk calculators and risk factors for Eosinophilic pneumonia diagnostic study of choice

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Mohammed Abdelwahed M.D[2]

Overview

Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is the diagnostic study of choice for eosinophilic pneumonia.

Diagnostic Study of Choice

Bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage

  • Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is performed in the majority of patients to exclude infection, hemorrhage, or malignancy.[1]
  • The BAL is performed using a sequential instillation and recovery of 50 to 60 mL aliquots in an area of radiographic opacity.
  • In acute pneumonia, the BAL fluid typically shows a very high proportion (>25 percent) and total number of eosinophils.[2]
  • The median BAL cellularity was 350,000/mm3. BAL eosinophilia was present in all cases with a median of 38%.
  • The proportion of BAL lymphocytes is approximately 10 to 30 percent and the proportion of BAL neutrophils is 1 to 16 percent.
  • The level of eosinophilia returns to normal when the illness resolves.

References

  1. ↑ Hayakawa H, Sato A, Toyoshima M, Imokawa S, Taniguchi M (1994). "A clinical study of idiopathic eosinophilic pneumonia". Chest. 105 (5): 1462–6. PMID 8181338.
  2. ↑ Ogawa H, Fujimura M, Matsuda T, Nakamura H, Kumabashiri I, Kitagawa S (1993). "Transient wheeze. Eosinophilic bronchobronchiolitis in acute eosinophilic pneumonia". Chest. 104 (2): 493–6. PMID 8339639.

Template:WH Template:WS

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidoc.org/index.php?title=Eosinophilic_pneumonia_diagnostic_study_of_choice&oldid=1457683"