Contacto

Barranca del Muerto 520, Los Alpes, Álvaro Obregón, C.P.01010, Ciudad de México, México

Teléfono

(+52) 55 9171 9570
CIR

Revista Virtual Individual

Autores: Lydia Chelala, MD • Ayodeji Adegunsoye, MD, PhD • Mary Strek, MD • Cathryn T. Lee, MD • Renea Jablonski, MD • Aliya N. Husain, MD • Inemesit Udofia, BS • Jonathan H. Chung, MD


RESUMEN:
Propósito: Comparar el rendimiento diagnóstico de las clasificaciones de imágenes de la American Thoracic Society, Japanese Respiratory Society y Asociación Latinoamericana del Tórax (ATS/JRS/ALAT) frente a las clasificaciones de la American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) para la neumonitis por hipersensibilidad (HP).
Materiales y Métodos: Se incluyeron en este estudio retrospectivo a pacientes del registro de Enfermedad Pulmonar Intersticial (ILD) aprobado por la junta de revisión institucional que fueron referidos para discusión multidisciplinaria (MDD) en la institución de los autores (1 de enero de 2006–1 de abril de 2021) cuando se diagnosticó ILD en MDD. Los diagnósticos de MDD incluyeron HP, enfermedad del tejido conectivo–ILD y fibrosis pulmonar idiopática. Se realizó una revisión retrospectiva de imágenes de TC de sección delgada en consenso por dos radiólogos cardiotorácicos cegados al diagnóstico. Se determinaron los patrones diagnósticos para las imágenes de TC de sección delgada utilizando ambas clasificaciones. Se determinaron las tasas de discordancia. Se evaluaron la sensibilidad, especificidad, valor predictivo positivo, valor predictivo negativo y precisión utilizando el diagnóstico de MDD como estándar de referencia.
Resultados: Se incluyeron un total de 297 pacientes en el estudio: 200 (67%) con HP, 49 (16%) con enfermedad del tejido conectivo–ILD y 48 (16%) con fibrosis pulmonar idiopática en MDD. La tasa de discordancia entre las dos clasificaciones fue del 21%. Suponiendo una baja prevalencia de HP (10%), la clasificación ATS/JRS/ALAT superó a la clasificación ACCP, con mayor precisión (92.3% frente a 87.6%) y mayor valor predictivo positivo (60.7% frente a 42.9%). Suponiendo una alta prevalencia (50%), la precisión y el valor predictivo negativo fueron superiores utilizando la clasificación ACCP (81.7% frente a 79.7% y 77.7% frente a 72.6%, respectivamente), y el valor predictivo positivo fue superior utilizando la clasificación ATS/JRS/ALAT (93.3% frente a 87.1%).
Conclusión: La precisión de las clasificaciones de HP ATS/JRS/ALAT y ACCP fue mayor en entornos con baja y alta prevalencia de HP, respectivamente. El rendimiento diagnóstico de ambas clasificaciones fue discordante en una minoría de casos.

PDF


ABSTRACT:
Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of the American Thoracic Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Asociación Latinoamericana del Tórax (ATS/JRS/ALAT) versus the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) imaging classifications for hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP).
Materials and Methods: Patients in the institutional review board–approved Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) registry referred for multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) at the authors’ institution (January 1, 2006–April 1, 2021) were included in this retrospective study when ILD was diagnosed at MDD. MDD diagnoses included HP, connective tissue disease–ILD, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Retrospective review of thin-section CT images was performed in consensus by two cardiothoracic radiologists blinded to the diagnosis. Diagnostic patterns were determined for thin-section CT images using both classifications. Discordance rates were determined. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were assessed using MDD diagnosis as the reference standard.
Results: A total of 297 patients were included in the study: 200 (67%) with HP, 49 (16%) with connective tissue disease–ILD, and 48 (16%) with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis at MDD. The discordance rate between the two classifications was 21%. Assuming low HP prevalence (10%), ATS/JRS/ALAT classification outperformed ACCP classification, with greater accuracy (92.3% vs 87.6%) and greater positive predictive value (60.7% vs 42.9%). Assuming high prevalence (50%), accuracy and negative predictive value were superior using ACCP classification (81.7% vs 79.7% and 77.7% vs 72.6%, respectively), and positive predictive value was superior using ATS/JRS/ALAT classification (93.3% vs 87.1%).
Conclusion: Accuracy of the ATS/JRS/ALAT and ACCP HP classifications was greater in settings with low and high HP prevalence, respectively. Diagnostic performance of both classifications was discordant in a minority of cases.

PDF


ABSTRACT:
Purpose: To compare the diagnostic performance of the American Thoracic Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Asociación Latinoamericana del Tórax (ATS/JRS/ALAT) versus the American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) imaging classifications for hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP).
Materials and Methods: Patients in the institutional review board–approved Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) registry referred for multidisciplinary discussion (MDD) at the authors’ institution (January 1, 2006–April 1, 2021) were included in this retrospective study when ILD was diagnosed at MDD. MDD diagnoses included HP, connective tissue disease–ILD, and idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Retrospective review of thin-section CT images was performed in consensus by two cardiothoracic radiologists blinded to the diagnosis. Diagnostic patterns were determined for thin-section CT images using both classifications. Discordance rates were determined. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were assessed using MDD diagnosis as the reference standard.
Results: A total of 297 patients were included in the study: 200 (67%) with HP, 49 (16%) with connective tissue disease–ILD, and 48 (16%) with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis at MDD. The discordance rate between the two classifications was 21%. Assuming low HP prevalence (10%), ATS/JRS/ALAT classification outperformed ACCP classification, with greater accuracy (92.3% vs 87.6%) and greater positive predictive value (60.7% vs 42.9%). Assuming high prevalence (50%), accuracy and negative predictive value were superior using ACCP classification (81.7% vs 79.7% and 77.7% vs 72.6%, respectively), and positive predictive value was superior using ATS/JRS/ALAT classification (93.3% vs 87.1%).
Conclusion: Accuracy of the ATS/JRS/ALAT and ACCP HP classifications was greater in settings with low and high HP prevalence, respectively. Diagnostic performance of both classifications was discordant in a minority of cases.