Predicting high risk of exacerbations in bronchiectasis: the E-FACED score.

BACKGROUND: Although the FACED score has demonstrated a great prognostic capacity in bronchiectasis, it does not include the number or severity of exacerbations as a separate variable, which is important in the natural history of these patients. OBJECTIVE: Construction and external validation of a new index, the E-FACED, to evaluate the predictive capacity of exacerbations and mortality. METHODS: The new score was constructed on the basis of the complete cohort for the construction of the original FACED score, while the external validation was undertaken with six cohorts from three countries (Brazil, Argentina, and Chile). The main outcome was the number of annual exacerbations/hospitalizations, with all-cause and respiratory-related deaths as the secondary outcomes. A statistical evaluation comprised the relative weight and ideal cut-off point for the number or severity of the exacerbations and was incorporated into the FACED score (E-FACED). The results obtained after the application of FACED and E-FACED were compared in both the cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 1,470 patients with bronchiectasis (819 from the construction cohorts and 651 from the external validation cohorts) were followed up for 5 years after diagnosis. The best cut-off point was at least two exacerbations in the previous year (two additional points), meaning that the E-FACED has nine points of growing severity. E-FACED presented an excellent prognostic capacity for exacerbations (areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve: 0.82 for at least two exacerbations in 1 year and 0.87 for at least one hospitalization in 1 year) that was statistically better than that of the FACED score (0.72 and 0.78, P<0.05, respectively). The predictive capacities for all-cause and respiratory mortality were 0.87 and 0.86, respectively, with both being similar to those of the FACED. CONCLUSION: E-FACED score significantly increases the FACED capacity to predict future yearly exacerbations while maintaining the score's simplicity and prognostic capacity for death.

Severe obstructive disease: similarities and differences between smoker and non-smoker patients with COPD and/or bronchiectasis.

INTRODUCTION: Poorly reversible airflow obstruction may or may not be related to smoking. OBJECTIVES: To describe patients with severe obstructive lung disease including etiology, imaging, functional aspects, systemic manifestations, and the pattern of bronchodilator response. METHODS: Sixty-eight patients (age 55.9±13.7 years, FEV(1) [forced expiratory volume in one second] 31.9±10.2% predicted) underwent spirometry, evaluation of body mass composition, 6-minute walk test, X-ray, thorax high-resolution CT scanning, and clinical evaluation. RESULTS: Of 68 patients enrolled, 37 had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and 31, extensive bronchiectasis. Among COPD patients the CT scans showed emphysema in 78.4%, and bronchiectasis in 48.6%. There were no significant differences between smokers and non-smokers, except for vital capacity, significantly smaller in non-smokers (p<0.001). We found 29 and 20 volume responders (VR) according to Paré et al. (FEV(1)/FVC>1=flow responder or <1=VR) and ATS/ERS criteria, respectively. According to Paré et al. criteria, there were 18 patients with FEV(1)<30% predicted among 29 VR, and 12 with FEV(1)<30% predicted among 39 without volume response (p=0.0101). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe obstruction, smoking does not appear to be relevant in determining functional or systemic differences, and Paré et al. criteria can detect more VR. Bronchiectasis is a common finding in severe COPD.