Rapid On-Site Evaluation, As a Diagnostic Method for PCP in a Patient with Nephrotic Syndrome

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-318635/v1

Download PDF

Case Report

Rapid On-Site Evaluation, As a Diagnostic Method for PCP in a Patient with Nephrotic Syndrome

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-318635/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Background: Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) is a common illness of the patients receiving long-term immunosuppressive treatment for which therapy is currently available. Early and prompt diagnosis of this pulmonary infection is a matter of great practical importance. Clinical presentation and radiology are not enough to confirm a diagnosis of PCP. Microscopic examination is available.

Case presentation: Here we report a 63-year-old man with nephrotic syndrome,who was transferred to ICU due to unexplained aggravation of infection. The cause of pulmonary infection was identified by Rapid on-site evaluation (ROSE) finally and targeted treatment was given.

Conclusions: ROSE can be a diagnostic approach for PCP, which is suitable for clinicians.

Pathology

rapid on-site evaluation

diagnostic approach

pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia

case report

Recent years, interventional pulmonology has been widely used in the diagnoses and treatment of lung diseases[1, 2]. As a “real-time accompany technique”, rapid on-site evaluation(ROSE) can be performed in various interventional procedure, including puncture, biopsy, brushing and etc[3–5]. It’s recommended to use ROSE from the point of reducing complications and enhancing the diagnostic yield[6]. However, the diagnostic value of ROSE in infectious diseases is ignored. Here we report a novel diagnostic approach for PCP through ROSE based on Diff-quick, which realized bedside rapid diagnosis.

A 63-year-old man presented to hospital with cough, fever, and chest pain. He was previously diagnosed with nephrotic syndrome, characterized by proteinuria and edema, and received the treatment with prednisone and tacrolimus for a long time. His initial laboratory findings demonstrated a white blood cell count of 10.49×10⁹/L, neutrophil counts of 8.87×10⁹/L, whole blood C-reactive protein and (1–3)-β-D-glucan concentrations of 155.81mg/L and 249.7pg/ml.The chest CT scan showed ground-glass opacification with a diffuse, bilateral and central location (Fig. 1a). Initial anti-infective treatment with cefoperazone tazobactam was ineffective, his symptoms were aggravated by cardiac tiredness, shortness of breath and dyspnea after exercise, repeated CT imaging showed no significant improvement (Fig .1b). Then, he was transferred to ICU for mechanical ventilation and underwent bronchoscopy. The focus sampling was accessed under the guidance of virtual navigation, and three forceps biopsy samples were collected (Fig. 2). ROSE was available for immediate microscopic assessment of the tissue and the diagnosis of Pneumocystis carinii was confirmed (Fig. 3a). He immediately received antifungal treatment with sulfamethoxazole (1.92g, q6h), subsequent staining (Fig. 3b-e) confirmed this diagnosis. However, repeated CT imaging still showed no significant improvement (Fig. 3c), he received carbofungin (the first day of 70 mg and followed by 50 mg daily), methylprednisolone (80 mg daily) and immunoglobulin (10g daily) for fungal infection. His symptoms relieved quickly and continued follow-up treatment.

In view of the non-specific clinical manifestations of PCP, the diagnosis requires confirmed evidence of pneumocystis carinii, which should not be based on clinical manifestations and imaging even in symptomatic high-risk patients[7].Microscopic identification of ascus and trophic forms is the most intuitive evidence, the diagnostic efficiency is largely determined by the staining method of specimen. Historically, Conventional stains such as Wright’s-Giemsa, hexaamine silver and toluidine blue are available for PCP, but it should be time consuming, also with lower sensitivity[8–10].In this case, immediate diagnosis of PCP was confirmed on the first day of the patient's transfer to ICU with the use of ROSE. Diff-quick has shown its advantage in identifying pneumocystis, characterized by clear structure, sharp contrast, easy identification of ascus (Fig. 3a).

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of ROSE used in bedside diagnosis of PCP combined with virtual bronchoscopy (VBN), there is only one previous report described the use of ROSE to diagnose PCP, carried by electromagnetic navigation bronchoscopy guided biopsies[11]. Differently, we used VBN, which can be started quickly at the bedside, and the real-time feedback from ROSE greatly reduces the operation time. But there's a problem, ROSE can be performed by cytotechnologist, pathologist or clinicians. cytotechnologist are the likeliest personnel for ROSE procedure. However, in clinical practice, clinicians replace the role. Study shows alternative evaluators can perform ROSE with acceptable accuracy (a sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 83%), whereas in wide variation and cannot be generalized[12].Standardized training seems to be needed. Training program could do help to improved the accuracy of adequacy assessment performed by clinicians, and eliminate confounding variables[13].

ROSE is mainly used to increase sampling adequacy for solid malignancies rather than infectious disease. If clinicians can get more useful information from ROSE feedback in infectious disease, it will prompt them to adjust their clinical decisions in a timely manner. Like this medical case, we can easily get diagnostic information from 8 intracapsular bodies under a microscope.

There is no doubt that the diagnostic value of ROSE in infectious diseases must be emphasized. ROSE can be carried out for definite diagnosis, such as PCP. However, many questions remain unclear and need to be solved, such as how to establish a standardized training program of ROSE, which infectious disease can be diagnosed by ROSE and will the ROSE diagnosis provided by clinicians guide clinical practice. More evidence-based studies need to be implemented.

ROSE: Rapid on-site evaluation; VBN:virtual bronchoscopy; PCP:Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia;

Ethics approval and consent to participate

As a case report, the ethics approval is not applicable.

Consent for publication

Consent for publication has been obtained from the patient.

Availability of data and materials

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

Not applicable.

Authors' contributions

WXW and AX Collected the patient's medical information. CX and GPY were responsible for pathological analysis. ZLJ and WXW were major contributors in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Acknowledgements

We express our gratitude to the patient in this case for providing the permission to publish this paper.

Shah PL, Herth FJF. Progress in Interventional Pulmonology. Respiration. 2018;95(5):287–8.
Hsia D, Musani AI. Interventional pulmonology. Med Clin North Am. 2011 Nov;95(6):1095–114.
Oki M, Saka H, Kitagawa C, et al. Rapid on-site cytologic evaluation during endobronchial ultrasound-guided transbronchial needle aspiration for diagnosing lung cancer: a randomized study. Respiration. 2013;85(6):486–92.
Yarmus L, Van der Kloot T, Lechtzin N, et al. A randomized prospective trial of the utility of rapid on-site evaluation of transbronchial needle aspirate specimens. J Bronchology Interv Pulmonol. 2011 Apr;18(2):121–7.
Zaric B, Eberhardt R, Herth F,et al. Linear and radial endobronchial ultrasound in diagnosis and staging of lung cancer. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2013 Sep;10(5):685–95.
Wang J, Zhao Y, Chen Q, et al. Diagnostic value of rapid on-site evaluation during transbronchial biopsy for peripheral lung cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2019 Jun 1;49(6):501–505.
Alanio A, Hauser PM, Lagrou K, et al. 5th European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL-5), a joint venture of The European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT), The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), the Immunocompromised Host Society (ICHS) and The European LeukemiaNet (ELN). ECIL guidelines for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in patients with haematological malignancies and stem cell transplant recipients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016; 71 (9):2386–2396.
Procop GW, Haddad S, Quinn J, et al. Detection of Pneumocystis jirovecii in respiratory specimens by four staining methods. J ClinMicrobiol. 2004;42(7):3333–5.
Desoubeaux G, Franck-Martel C, Caille A, et al.Use of calcofluorblue brightener for the diagnosis of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in bronchial-alveolar lavage fluids: a single-centre prospective study. Med Mycol. 2016. Epub ahead of print.
Flori P, Bellete B, Durand F, et al. Comparison between real-time PCR, conventional PCR and different staining techniques for diagnosing Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia from bronchoalveolarlavage specimens. J Med Microbiol. 2004;53:603–7.
Houshmand F, Aly FZ, Bowling MR. A novel diagnostic approach for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia using fine-needle aspiration, electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy and rapid on-site evaluation. Ann Thorac Med. 2019;14(4):285–7.
Pearson L, Factor RE, White SK, Walker BS, Layfield LJ, Schmidt RL. Rapid On-Site Evaluation of Fine-Needle Aspiration by Non-Cytopathologists: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies for Adequacy Assessment. Acta Cytol. 2018;62(4):244–52.
Petrone MC, Arcidiacono PG, Carrara S, et al. Does cytotechnician training influence the accuracy of EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration of pancreatic masses? Dig Liver Dis. 2012;44(4):311–4.

CAREchecklist.pdf

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Rapid On-Site Evaluation, As a Diagnostic Method for PCP in a Patient with Nephrotic Syndrome

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Background

Case Presentation

Discussion And Conclusions

Abbreviations

Declarations

References

Supplementary Files

Status:

Version 1