User login
Interventional chest and diagnostic procedures
Risk stratification and management of pleural infections
Pleural infection carries a significant health care burden with an estimated mortality rate between 10% and 20% in adults. Standard of care for pleural infections has traditionally included antibiotics and tube thoracostomy, with select patients requiring a surgical intervention. The landmark MIST II trial demonstrated that combination intrapleural fibrinolytic and DNase therapy led to reduced length of stay and lower surgical referral rates compared with placebo.1 While the use of combination intrapleural therapy has become common in the management of these patients, controversies still exist regarding nuances related to the various aspects of this therapy. A recent position paper published in Lancet Respiratory Medicine2 addresses these knowledge gaps and provides recommendations to offer guidance in decision-making. The consensus statement by the authors addresses the topics of intrapleural monotherapy, dosing regimen, sequence of dosing, and cost considerations amongst other things. The authors also summarize evidence and discuss a surgery first vs. intrapleural enzyme therapy first approach based on stage of empyema and presence of surgical expertise and surgical candidacy. However, the debate between early surgical intervention vs early intrapleural enzyme therapy has not been settled yet. A large prospective randomized control trial is currently ongoing to help answer this question [https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18192121].
Meanwhile, there has been a lack of robust validated prediction methods for selecting high-risk patients at presentation with pleural infection for an early aggressive intervention. Based on previous studies, Rahman et al.3 had described the RAPID (Renal[urea], Age, fluid Purulence, Infection Source, Dietary [albumin]) score for risk stratification of these patients. Corcoran et al.4 recently conducted a prospective, observational study and validated that the RAPID risk category (Low-risk [0-2], Medium-risk [3-4], and High-risk [5-7]) can help predict mortality at 3 months. This score may prove to be a useful tool for future research directed at improving outcomes in patients with pleural infections.
Abhinav Agrawal, MD
Samaan Rafeq , MD
NetWork Members
References
1. Rahman NM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):518.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1012740.
2. Chaddha U, et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2021. S2213-2600(20)30533-6. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30533-6.
3. Rahman NM, et al. Chest. 2014 Apr;145(4):848. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-1558.
4. Corcoran JP, et al. Eur Respir J. 2020 Nov 26;56(5):2000130. doi: 10.1183/13993003.00130-2020.
Pediatric chest medicine
Appendicitis and COVID-19
During the 2020-21 year, there was an unprecedent amount of literature and studies released to the scientific and general public about the severe, acute respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) syndrome, commonly referred to as COVID-19. The impressive focus on SARS-CoV-2 appeared appropriately featured given the public health concerns with contraction of the disease. 
While it is important to understand the potential presentations, complications, and treatments in the adult population, clinicians must be aware of the impact of this disease on children. Contrary to reports early in the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 infection can lead to serious complications in the pediatric population. One complication is a condition called multisystem inflammation syndrome in children (MIS-C) that can mimic Kawasaki disease or toxic shock syndrome. In addition to the expected common clinical presentation of respiratory symptoms and fever, gastrointestinal complaints were reported in up to 84% of the infected children. Gastrointestinal symptoms may be the only complaint in this population, typically presenting with nausea, emesis, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. The Pediatric Chest NetWork intends to highlight these gastrointestinal complaints and make clinicians aware of an appendicitis-like syndrome or even true acute appendicitis that seems to occur in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There is a handful of case reports and case series that discussed this phenomenon. Due to the overlap of presenting symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute appendicitis, clinicians must astutely evaluate patients to prevent worsening complications of a missed diagnosed appendicitis.
Eric Mull, DO
NetWork Fellow-in-Training
Pulmonary physiology, function, and rehabilitation
Lung function testing during the COVID-19 pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic poses unique challenges to caring for patients with established lung disease or new onset respiratory complaints. Although maneuvers differ across individual tests, most involve forced expiration or high ventilatory rates. They also tend to generate cough. Because the SARS-CoV-2 virus is predominantly spread via respiratory droplets, coughing, forced expiration, and high ventilatory rates will increase the risk for transmission.
Respiratory societies across the world have developed recommendations for operating a pulmonary function lab during the pandemic (Pulmonology. 2020 Aug 5;S2531-0437[20]30175-6; Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020;17[11]:1343). In general, deferring all non-ssential testing and adjusting precautions and testing volume by local infection rates is recommended. Using proper personal protective equipment (PPE), including N95 respirators for staff, enhanced cleaning of rooms and PFT equipment (per manufacturer recommendations), and allowing time for adequate air exchange between tests are recommended practices. Screening for symptoms prior to testing is mandatory, with the recognition that for pulmonary patients, the specificity for COVID-19 will be poor. Finally, testing for SARS-CoV-2, generally within 72 hours, and using negative pressure rooms, has been encouraged by all, though there is variation by institution and resources.
It remains imperative that lung function labs provide a safe environment for patients and staff. However, delays related to deferrals and the increased turnover time required for cleaning and air circulation grow worse over time. As the pandemic persists, the mounting toll on our pulmonary patients looms large – so please, get vaccinated and use proper precautions.
Thomas Decato, MD, FCCP
Vice-Chair
Aaron Holley, MD, FCCP
NetWork Member
Pulmonary vascular disease
I screen, you screen, we all screen for ... PAH
Although rare in the general population, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) occurs more frequently in connective tissue disease, congenital heart disease, HIV, portal hypertension, and in carriers of gene mutations of heritable PAH. Given the high morbidity and mortality, and improved outcomes with earlier diagnosis and treatment, guidelines recommend aggressive assessment and screening for PAH in these high-risk groups (Frost A, et al. Eur Respir J. 2019; 53:1801904).
Effective PAH screening algorithms have been developed in systemic sclerosis. The best validated screening tool is the DETECT algorithm (Coghlan JG, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:1340), which uses clinical, laboratory, and pulmonary function test parameters in conjunction with echocardiographic findings to recommend right heart catheterization (RHC) for PH diagnosis. Multimodal assessments are more sensitive than echocardiography alone in diagnosing PAH in systemic sclerosis (Hao Y, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2015;17:7) and should be developed in other at-risk cohorts.
Recently, the DELPHI-2 study prospectively screened 55 asymptomatic adult carriers of a BMPR2 mutation- the most common genetic mutation in heritable PAH- for minimum of 2 years (Montani D, et al. Eur Respir J. 2020 Dec 30;2004229. doi: 10.1183/13993003.04229-2020). Using predefined symptomatic, echocardiographic, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing criteria for referral for RHC, the incidence of PAH was 2.3% per year. This study lays the foundation for a multimodal approach to screening carriers of BMPR2 mutations and emphasizes the importance of genetic counseling for idiopathic and familial PAH patients to identify mutation carriers who stand to benefit from appropriate PAH screening.
Christopher J. Mullin, MD, MHS
Steering Committee Member
Interventional chest and diagnostic procedures
Risk stratification and management of pleural infections
Pleural infection carries a significant health care burden with an estimated mortality rate between 10% and 20% in adults. Standard of care for pleural infections has traditionally included antibiotics and tube thoracostomy, with select patients requiring a surgical intervention. The landmark MIST II trial demonstrated that combination intrapleural fibrinolytic and DNase therapy led to reduced length of stay and lower surgical referral rates compared with placebo.1 While the use of combination intrapleural therapy has become common in the management of these patients, controversies still exist regarding nuances related to the various aspects of this therapy. A recent position paper published in Lancet Respiratory Medicine2 addresses these knowledge gaps and provides recommendations to offer guidance in decision-making. The consensus statement by the authors addresses the topics of intrapleural monotherapy, dosing regimen, sequence of dosing, and cost considerations amongst other things. The authors also summarize evidence and discuss a surgery first vs. intrapleural enzyme therapy first approach based on stage of empyema and presence of surgical expertise and surgical candidacy. However, the debate between early surgical intervention vs early intrapleural enzyme therapy has not been settled yet. A large prospective randomized control trial is currently ongoing to help answer this question [https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18192121].
Meanwhile, there has been a lack of robust validated prediction methods for selecting high-risk patients at presentation with pleural infection for an early aggressive intervention. Based on previous studies, Rahman et al.3 had described the RAPID (Renal[urea], Age, fluid Purulence, Infection Source, Dietary [albumin]) score for risk stratification of these patients. Corcoran et al.4 recently conducted a prospective, observational study and validated that the RAPID risk category (Low-risk [0-2], Medium-risk [3-4], and High-risk [5-7]) can help predict mortality at 3 months. This score may prove to be a useful tool for future research directed at improving outcomes in patients with pleural infections.
Abhinav Agrawal, MD
Samaan Rafeq , MD
NetWork Members
References
1. Rahman NM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):518.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1012740.
2. Chaddha U, et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2021. S2213-2600(20)30533-6. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30533-6.
3. Rahman NM, et al. Chest. 2014 Apr;145(4):848. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-1558.
4. Corcoran JP, et al. Eur Respir J. 2020 Nov 26;56(5):2000130. doi: 10.1183/13993003.00130-2020.
Pediatric chest medicine
Appendicitis and COVID-19
During the 2020-21 year, there was an unprecedent amount of literature and studies released to the scientific and general public about the severe, acute respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) syndrome, commonly referred to as COVID-19. The impressive focus on SARS-CoV-2 appeared appropriately featured given the public health concerns with contraction of the disease.
While it is important to understand the potential presentations, complications, and treatments in the adult population, clinicians must be aware of the impact of this disease on children. Contrary to reports early in the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 infection can lead to serious complications in the pediatric population. One complication is a condition called multisystem inflammation syndrome in children (MIS-C) that can mimic Kawasaki disease or toxic shock syndrome. In addition to the expected common clinical presentation of respiratory symptoms and fever, gastrointestinal complaints were reported in up to 84% of the infected children. Gastrointestinal symptoms may be the only complaint in this population, typically presenting with nausea, emesis, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. The Pediatric Chest NetWork intends to highlight these gastrointestinal complaints and make clinicians aware of an appendicitis-like syndrome or even true acute appendicitis that seems to occur in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There is a handful of case reports and case series that discussed this phenomenon. Due to the overlap of presenting symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute appendicitis, clinicians must astutely evaluate patients to prevent worsening complications of a missed diagnosed appendicitis.
Eric Mull, DO
NetWork Fellow-in-Training
Pulmonary physiology, function, and rehabilitation
Lung function testing during the COVID-19 pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic poses unique challenges to caring for patients with established lung disease or new onset respiratory complaints. Although maneuvers differ across individual tests, most involve forced expiration or high ventilatory rates. They also tend to generate cough. Because the SARS-CoV-2 virus is predominantly spread via respiratory droplets, coughing, forced expiration, and high ventilatory rates will increase the risk for transmission.
Respiratory societies across the world have developed recommendations for operating a pulmonary function lab during the pandemic (Pulmonology. 2020 Aug 5;S2531-0437[20]30175-6; Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020;17[11]:1343). In general, deferring all non-ssential testing and adjusting precautions and testing volume by local infection rates is recommended. Using proper personal protective equipment (PPE), including N95 respirators for staff, enhanced cleaning of rooms and PFT equipment (per manufacturer recommendations), and allowing time for adequate air exchange between tests are recommended practices. Screening for symptoms prior to testing is mandatory, with the recognition that for pulmonary patients, the specificity for COVID-19 will be poor. Finally, testing for SARS-CoV-2, generally within 72 hours, and using negative pressure rooms, has been encouraged by all, though there is variation by institution and resources.
It remains imperative that lung function labs provide a safe environment for patients and staff. However, delays related to deferrals and the increased turnover time required for cleaning and air circulation grow worse over time. As the pandemic persists, the mounting toll on our pulmonary patients looms large – so please, get vaccinated and use proper precautions.
Thomas Decato, MD, FCCP
Vice-Chair
Aaron Holley, MD, FCCP
NetWork Member
Pulmonary vascular disease
I screen, you screen, we all screen for ... PAH
Although rare in the general population, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) occurs more frequently in connective tissue disease, congenital heart disease, HIV, portal hypertension, and in carriers of gene mutations of heritable PAH. Given the high morbidity and mortality, and improved outcomes with earlier diagnosis and treatment, guidelines recommend aggressive assessment and screening for PAH in these high-risk groups (Frost A, et al. Eur Respir J. 2019; 53:1801904).
Effective PAH screening algorithms have been developed in systemic sclerosis. The best validated screening tool is the DETECT algorithm (Coghlan JG, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:1340), which uses clinical, laboratory, and pulmonary function test parameters in conjunction with echocardiographic findings to recommend right heart catheterization (RHC) for PH diagnosis. Multimodal assessments are more sensitive than echocardiography alone in diagnosing PAH in systemic sclerosis (Hao Y, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2015;17:7) and should be developed in other at-risk cohorts.
Recently, the DELPHI-2 study prospectively screened 55 asymptomatic adult carriers of a BMPR2 mutation- the most common genetic mutation in heritable PAH- for minimum of 2 years (Montani D, et al. Eur Respir J. 2020 Dec 30;2004229. doi: 10.1183/13993003.04229-2020). Using predefined symptomatic, echocardiographic, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing criteria for referral for RHC, the incidence of PAH was 2.3% per year. This study lays the foundation for a multimodal approach to screening carriers of BMPR2 mutations and emphasizes the importance of genetic counseling for idiopathic and familial PAH patients to identify mutation carriers who stand to benefit from appropriate PAH screening.
Christopher J. Mullin, MD, MHS
Steering Committee Member
Interventional chest and diagnostic procedures
Risk stratification and management of pleural infections
Pleural infection carries a significant health care burden with an estimated mortality rate between 10% and 20% in adults. Standard of care for pleural infections has traditionally included antibiotics and tube thoracostomy, with select patients requiring a surgical intervention. The landmark MIST II trial demonstrated that combination intrapleural fibrinolytic and DNase therapy led to reduced length of stay and lower surgical referral rates compared with placebo.1 While the use of combination intrapleural therapy has become common in the management of these patients, controversies still exist regarding nuances related to the various aspects of this therapy. A recent position paper published in Lancet Respiratory Medicine2 addresses these knowledge gaps and provides recommendations to offer guidance in decision-making. The consensus statement by the authors addresses the topics of intrapleural monotherapy, dosing regimen, sequence of dosing, and cost considerations amongst other things. The authors also summarize evidence and discuss a surgery first vs. intrapleural enzyme therapy first approach based on stage of empyema and presence of surgical expertise and surgical candidacy. However, the debate between early surgical intervention vs early intrapleural enzyme therapy has not been settled yet. A large prospective randomized control trial is currently ongoing to help answer this question [https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN18192121].
Meanwhile, there has been a lack of robust validated prediction methods for selecting high-risk patients at presentation with pleural infection for an early aggressive intervention. Based on previous studies, Rahman et al.3 had described the RAPID (Renal[urea], Age, fluid Purulence, Infection Source, Dietary [albumin]) score for risk stratification of these patients. Corcoran et al.4 recently conducted a prospective, observational study and validated that the RAPID risk category (Low-risk [0-2], Medium-risk [3-4], and High-risk [5-7]) can help predict mortality at 3 months. This score may prove to be a useful tool for future research directed at improving outcomes in patients with pleural infections.
Abhinav Agrawal, MD
Samaan Rafeq , MD
NetWork Members
References
1. Rahman NM, et al. N Engl J Med. 2011 Aug 11;365(6):518.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1012740.
2. Chaddha U, et al. Lancet Respir Med. 2021. S2213-2600(20)30533-6. doi: 10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30533-6.
3. Rahman NM, et al. Chest. 2014 Apr;145(4):848. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-1558.
4. Corcoran JP, et al. Eur Respir J. 2020 Nov 26;56(5):2000130. doi: 10.1183/13993003.00130-2020.
Pediatric chest medicine
Appendicitis and COVID-19
During the 2020-21 year, there was an unprecedent amount of literature and studies released to the scientific and general public about the severe, acute respiratory Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) syndrome, commonly referred to as COVID-19. The impressive focus on SARS-CoV-2 appeared appropriately featured given the public health concerns with contraction of the disease.
While it is important to understand the potential presentations, complications, and treatments in the adult population, clinicians must be aware of the impact of this disease on children. Contrary to reports early in the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2 infection can lead to serious complications in the pediatric population. One complication is a condition called multisystem inflammation syndrome in children (MIS-C) that can mimic Kawasaki disease or toxic shock syndrome. In addition to the expected common clinical presentation of respiratory symptoms and fever, gastrointestinal complaints were reported in up to 84% of the infected children. Gastrointestinal symptoms may be the only complaint in this population, typically presenting with nausea, emesis, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. The Pediatric Chest NetWork intends to highlight these gastrointestinal complaints and make clinicians aware of an appendicitis-like syndrome or even true acute appendicitis that seems to occur in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection. There is a handful of case reports and case series that discussed this phenomenon. Due to the overlap of presenting symptoms in SARS-CoV-2 infection and acute appendicitis, clinicians must astutely evaluate patients to prevent worsening complications of a missed diagnosed appendicitis.
Eric Mull, DO
NetWork Fellow-in-Training
Pulmonary physiology, function, and rehabilitation
Lung function testing during the COVID-19 pandemic
The COVID-19 pandemic poses unique challenges to caring for patients with established lung disease or new onset respiratory complaints. Although maneuvers differ across individual tests, most involve forced expiration or high ventilatory rates. They also tend to generate cough. Because the SARS-CoV-2 virus is predominantly spread via respiratory droplets, coughing, forced expiration, and high ventilatory rates will increase the risk for transmission.
Respiratory societies across the world have developed recommendations for operating a pulmonary function lab during the pandemic (Pulmonology. 2020 Aug 5;S2531-0437[20]30175-6; Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020;17[11]:1343). In general, deferring all non-ssential testing and adjusting precautions and testing volume by local infection rates is recommended. Using proper personal protective equipment (PPE), including N95 respirators for staff, enhanced cleaning of rooms and PFT equipment (per manufacturer recommendations), and allowing time for adequate air exchange between tests are recommended practices. Screening for symptoms prior to testing is mandatory, with the recognition that for pulmonary patients, the specificity for COVID-19 will be poor. Finally, testing for SARS-CoV-2, generally within 72 hours, and using negative pressure rooms, has been encouraged by all, though there is variation by institution and resources.
It remains imperative that lung function labs provide a safe environment for patients and staff. However, delays related to deferrals and the increased turnover time required for cleaning and air circulation grow worse over time. As the pandemic persists, the mounting toll on our pulmonary patients looms large – so please, get vaccinated and use proper precautions.
Thomas Decato, MD, FCCP
Vice-Chair
Aaron Holley, MD, FCCP
NetWork Member
Pulmonary vascular disease
I screen, you screen, we all screen for ... PAH
Although rare in the general population, pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) occurs more frequently in connective tissue disease, congenital heart disease, HIV, portal hypertension, and in carriers of gene mutations of heritable PAH. Given the high morbidity and mortality, and improved outcomes with earlier diagnosis and treatment, guidelines recommend aggressive assessment and screening for PAH in these high-risk groups (Frost A, et al. Eur Respir J. 2019; 53:1801904).
Effective PAH screening algorithms have been developed in systemic sclerosis. The best validated screening tool is the DETECT algorithm (Coghlan JG, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:1340), which uses clinical, laboratory, and pulmonary function test parameters in conjunction with echocardiographic findings to recommend right heart catheterization (RHC) for PH diagnosis. Multimodal assessments are more sensitive than echocardiography alone in diagnosing PAH in systemic sclerosis (Hao Y, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2015;17:7) and should be developed in other at-risk cohorts.
Recently, the DELPHI-2 study prospectively screened 55 asymptomatic adult carriers of a BMPR2 mutation- the most common genetic mutation in heritable PAH- for minimum of 2 years (Montani D, et al. Eur Respir J. 2020 Dec 30;2004229. doi: 10.1183/13993003.04229-2020). Using predefined symptomatic, echocardiographic, and cardiopulmonary exercise testing criteria for referral for RHC, the incidence of PAH was 2.3% per year. This study lays the foundation for a multimodal approach to screening carriers of BMPR2 mutations and emphasizes the importance of genetic counseling for idiopathic and familial PAH patients to identify mutation carriers who stand to benefit from appropriate PAH screening.
Christopher J. Mullin, MD, MHS
Steering Committee Member