|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I know of several instances in which patients treated with prophylactic aerosolized pentamidine who had a suspected breakthrough of P. carinii pneumonia were referred for bronchoscopy without a prior examination of induced sputum. One cytology laboratory stopped analyzing sputum samples obtained from patients who had been receiving aerosolized pentamidine prophylaxis. If patients with suspected P. carinii pneumonia are denied induced-sputum analysis, they may be subjected to unnecessary bronchoscopy.
Mark L. Metersky, M.D.
Mount Sinai Hospital
Hartford, CT 06112
References
David Wlody, M.D.
State University of New York
Brooklyn, NY 11203
Gerald N. Cohen, M.D.
St. Francis Hospital
Evanston, IL 60202
References
To the Editor: Dr. Metersky has appropriately pointed out that not all studies have shown a decreased diagnostic yield of induced sputum for P. carinii in patients receiving aerosolized pentamidine. A variety of confounding variables have been proposed to explain these differences in results1. Despite the unresolved issue and the variability of the numbers from study to study, I agree entirely that analysis of induced sputum remains useful in patients receiving aerosolized pentamidine and that it should not be bypassed in favor of bronchoscopy. Even in the study by Levine and colleagues,2 64 percent of the patients in whom P. carinii pneumonia developed while they were receiving aerosolized pentamidine had positive induced sputum (as compared with 92 percent of the patients who did not receive prophylaxis). Therefore, sputum induction can still eliminate the need for bronchoscopy in order to diagnose P. carinii in the majority of patients receiving aerosolized pentamidine.
I thank Dr. Wlody for pointing out that the correct term is "deoxygenated" rather than "reduced" hemoglobin. Somehow, "reduced hemoglobin" has slipped into common usage as well as into many articles and textbooks, and it unfortunately slipped into my article as well.
Dr. Cohen raises an important issue that remains quite controversial. Even though there is a strong association between allergy and asthma, it does not necessarily follow that desensitization is an effective and important form of therapy for asthma. As pointed out by Ohman3 in a review of allergen desensitization in the treatment of asthma, the benefit has been inconsistent. Some of the practical problems include the variability of antigen preparations, different regimens of administration, the need for prolonged therapy, and uncertainty about the need for desensitization against multiple antigens. Until there is better documentation of the clinical efficacy of allergen desensitization in adult asthma, this form of therapy is likely to remain an area of controversy.
Steven E. Weinberger, M.D.
Beth Israel Hospital
Boston, MA 02215
References
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article has been cited by other articles:
HOME | SUBSCRIBE | SEARCH | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | COLLECTIONS | PRIVACY | HELP | beta.nejm.org Comments and questions? Please contact us. The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved. |