Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Respir Med Case Rep ; 24: 40-43, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29977755

ABSTRACT

Pneumocytic adenomyoepithelioma is an extremely rare and poorly understood pulmonary neoplasm, so experience with this tumor is limited. Since the initial case series where the lesion was first proposed as a distinctive entity, only one additional report has been described. We present a case of pneumocytic adenomyoepithelioma with clinical and radiologic data that provide the first long-term evidence of the benignity of this extremely rare pulmonary neoplasm. We also review the available literature surrounding pneumocytic adenomyoepitheliomas. Our case provides important new data on the behavior of this lesion, as imaging studies showed essentially stable or very slowly progressive disease over the course of approximately 9 years. Collectively, this rare and poorly described lesion appears to behave in an indolent or benign fashion, a notion that our case further supports.

2.
J Clin Microbiol ; 53(12): 3784-7, 2015 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26378282

ABSTRACT

The FilmArray respiratory panel (FARP) reliably and rapidly identifies 17 viruses and 3 bacterial pathogens. A nasopharyngeal swab FARP (NP FARP) is performed for many patients with respiratory symptoms. For patients who are acutely ill or immunocompromised or fail to improve, a bronchoalveolar lavage sample FARP (BAL FARP) is performed in addition to the NP FARP. To date, no studies have compared the yield of a BAL FARP with that of an NP FARP. We retrospectively studied all patients who had a BAL FARP within 7 days after an NP FARP between June 2013 and May 2014. Demographic information, comorbidities, FARP results, and all microbiologic data from BAL fluid were collected. Eighty-six patients had a BAL FARP performed within 7 days (mean, 1.6; median, 1) after an NP FARP. Of these, 66 (77%) had concordant BAL and NP FARP results: 15 (23%) had the same pathogen identified from the NP and BAL FARPs, and 51 (77%) had concordant negative FARP results. In 18 of the 86 patients (21%), a pathogen was detected from the NP FARP; of these, 15 (83%) had a concordant match on a subsequent BAL FARP, and the remaining 3 had negative BAL FARPs. In 17 of the 86 patients (20%), pathogens were identified from the BAL FARPs that were not detected by the NP FARPs; of these, 16 (94%) had initial negative NP FARPs. The data suggest that once a pathogen is identified by an NP FARP, a subsequent BAL FARP is unlikely to add new microbiologic information. However, a BAL FARP may provide new, useful microbiologic information when performed within 7 days after a negative NP FARP.


Subject(s)
Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid/microbiology , Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid/virology , Molecular Diagnostic Techniques/methods , Nasopharynx/microbiology , Nasopharynx/virology , Respiratory Tract Infections/diagnosis , Specimen Handling/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Respiratory Tract Infections/microbiology , Respiratory Tract Infections/virology , Retrospective Studies , Sensitivity and Specificity
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL