机构地区:[1]北京市大兴区人民医院呼吸内科,102600 [2]北京市大兴区人民医院放射科,102600
出 处:《中华全科医师杂志》2018年第2期114-119,共6页Chinese Journal of General Practitioners
摘 要:目的探讨不同表型支气管扩张症(支扩)患者肺功能、生命质量评分、急性加重次数、住院风险及预后的差异。 方法采用简单随机抽样法抽取122例2014年1月1日至2015年7月31日在我院呼吸科门诊就诊支扩患者,按肺高分辨率CT结果分为囊状支扩与非囊状支扩患者,按临床症状分为干性支扩与咳嗽咳痰型支扩患者,按痰培养结果分为有细菌定植与无细菌定植患者。对比不同表型支扩患者改良英国医学研究委员会呼吸问卷(mMRC)、莱切斯特咳嗽问卷(LCQ)、圣·乔治呼吸问卷(SGRQ)评分及肺功能差异;随访1年,对比分析不同表型支扩患者的急性加重次数、住院风险及预后差异。 结果干性支扩患者mMRC评分[(1.90±0.94)分比(2.90±1.09)分,t=-5.040]、LCQ评分[(16.20±4.60)分比(11.20±2.20)分,t=8.114]、SGRQ评分[(36.80±13.10)比(52.06±22.10),t=-4.780]、第1秒用力呼气容积占预计值百分比(FEV1%pred)[(68.45±26.50)比(52.22±20.60),t=3.458]、用力肺活量占预计值百分比(FVC%pred)[(72.20±26.32)比(63.10±21.42),t=2.058]、第1秒用力呼气量占用力肺活量比值(FEV1/FVC)[(75.14±20.52)比(58.12±19.82),t=4.546]、一氧化碳弥散量(DLCO)[(76.24±28.40)比( 54.32±21.20),t=4.400]、1年内急性加重次数(Z=-8.272)、1年内住院人数[6 (14.29%)比29 (36.25%),χ2=6.495]均轻于咳嗽咳痰型支扩患者(均P〈0.05);囊状支扩患者mMRC[(3.20±2.10)分比(2.10±1.40)分,t=3.131]、LCQ评分[(10.12±2.63)分比(16.22±3.22)分,t=11.365]、SGRQ评分[(54.80±18.12)分比(34.06±12.10)分,t=6.839]、FEV1%pred[(46.52±22.55)比(58.22±24.62),t=-2.611]、FVC%pred[(60.24±18.22)比(70.10±24.20),t=-2.547]、FEV1/FVC[(62.54±19.02)比(73.12±18.42),t=-3.025]、DLCO[(62.24±22.40)比(7ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical features of patients with bronchiectasis of different types. MethodsOne hundred and twenty two patients with bronchiectasis at stable stage were recruited from January 2014 to July 2015. The patients were typed as cystic bronchiectasis (n=45) or non-cystic bronchiectasis (n=77) by high resolution CT (HRCT), expectoration bronchiectasis (n=80) or dry brochiectasis (n=42) by clinical symptoms, bacterial colonization (n=42) or non-bacterial colonization (n=80) by sputum culture. The modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale, Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ), St George′s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and pulmonary function test were used to assess the clinical features, and the episodes of exacerbations and hospitalization, and mortality during 1-year follow-up were documented. ResultsmMRC dyspnea scale(1.90±0.94 vs. 2.90±1.09, t=-5.040), LCQ (16.20±4.60 vs. 11.20±2.20, t=8.114), SGRQ (36.80±13.10 vs. 52.06±22.10, t=-4.780), FEV1% pred (68.45±26.50 vs. 52.22±20.60, t=3.458), FVC% pred (72.20±26.32 vs. 63.10±21.42, t=2.058), FEV1/FVC (75.14±20.52 vs. 58.12±19.82, t=4.546 ), diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) (76.24±28.40 vs. 54.32±21.20, t=4.400), episodes of exacerbations (Z=-8.272 ) and hospitalization during 1-year follow-up [6(14.29%) vs. 29(36.25%), χ2=6.495] in patients with dry bronchiectasis were significantly better than those in patients with expectoration bronchiectasis (all P〈0.05). mMRC dyspnea scale(3.20±2.10 vs. 2.10±1.40, t=3.131), LCQ (10.12±2.63 vs. 16.22±3.22, t=11.365), SGRQ (54.80±18.12 vs. 34.06±12.10, t=6.839) and FEV1% pred (46.52±22.55 vs. 58.22±24.62, t=-2.611), FVC% pred (60.24±18.22 vs. 70.10±24.20, t=-2.547), FEV1/FVC (62.54±19.02 vs. 73.12±18.42, t=-3.025), DLCO (62.24±22.40 vs. 74.52±26.26, t=-2.627), episodes of exacerbations (Z=10.213) and hosp
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...