Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Is “nonusual interstitial pneumonia” an acceptable diagnosis?

J. Behr
European Respiratory Journal 2002 20: 1069-1070; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.02.00405902
J. Behr
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

The recently published “Classification of Idiopathic Interstitial Pneumonias (IIPs)” differentiates seven disease entities 1 as follows: 1) usual interstitial pneuminia (UIP), 2) desquamative interstitial pneumonia (DIP), 3) respiratory bronchiolitis-associated interstitial lung disease (RBILD), 4) nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP), 5) acute interstitial pneumonia (AIP), 6) cryptogenic organising pneumonia (COP), and 7) lymphoid interstitial pneumonia (LIP). These entities have primarily been defined pathologically 1. However, in clinical practice only a minority of patients with suspected IIP undergo surgical lung biopsy 3. Diagnostic criteria that allow a clinical diagnosis in the absence of a surgical lung biopsy have been defined only for UIP 4. In two previous publications the overall accuracy of a clinical diagnosis of UIP varied from 62–77% and the overall accuracy of a radiological diagnosis of UIP was about 75% 5. The most important noninvasive diagnostic tool for the diagnosis and differentiation of IIPs is the high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) 7. It has also been demonstrated that a HRCT showing features not typical of UIP is associated with a relatively good prognosis, which is comparable to that of histologically proven NSIP 10. The presence of a significant amount of ground glass opacities and the absence of honeycombing is especially indicative of a favourable response to corticosteroids and a good prognosis in general. However, the discussion on how to diagnose the different forms of IIPs is still ongoing, despite the general contention that a surgical lung biopsy is the “gold standard”.

In this issue of the European Respiratory Journal, Watanabe et al. 11 present a study which investigated the usefulness of transbronchial lung biopsy (TBLB) to predict the response to steroids in patients with IIPs who were unlikely to be UIP, but were not surgically biopsied. They report that selected patients, who showed a dense cellular interstitial infiltration on TBLB, experienced a similar good response to steroid treatment as patients with NSIP proven by surgical biopsy. The study, however, has several limitations, especially due to the small number of patients (only nine such “non-UIP” patients were evaluated) and the retrospective design. Most importantly, the patients in whom the TBLB was employed as an additional diagnostic test, had been preselected on the basis of HRCTs showing a “non-UIP” pattern in all of them 11. Daniil et al. 10 have previously reported that a high proportion of these patients do respond to anti-inflammatory therapy and have a relatively good prognosis, comparable to patients with histologically proven NSIP. The additional prognostic contribution of a histological finding of “dense mononuclear cell infiltration in thickened alveolar septa” in a TBLB specimen from IIP-patients can not be assessed from the data presented by Watanabe et al. 11. This is especially true because there is no proper control group in their paper. The comparison of the “non-UIP” group with a group of 10 patients with histologically proven NSIP is suggestive but does not prove that TBLB is necessary in those patients, in whom a favourable prognosis can be expected from the HRCT findings alone. In order to demonstrate an additional diagnostic impact of TBLB over HRCT alone, two control groups would be necessary: one composed of patients with HRCT findings not compatible with UIP who would not undergo any type of lung biopsy and one of patients with HRCT findings not compatible with UIP who would undergo TBLB and would not show a “dense mononuclear cell infiltration in thickened alveolar septa” on this type of biopsy.

Moreover, it should be noted that it is still not possible to identify different forms of IIPs with the help of TBLB or to make a specific diagnostic contribution with TBLB beyond the exclusion of granulomatous lung diseases, malignancy and some infections. A general strategy of using HRCT and TBLB for diagnosing IIPs would introduce an unacceptable simplification into the differential diagnosis of the IIPs, resulting in only two possible diagnoses, “UIP” and “non-UIP”. The progress in the last few years in the field of IIPs, which has allowed clinical trials in larger homogeneous patient populations to be performed for the first time, would be challenged if these strategies became general clinical practice.

Nevertheless, Watanabe et al. 11 have contributed to an ongoing discussion. Their paper may inspire other groups to investigate more thoroughly the diagnostic yield of transbronchial lung biopsy in idiopathic interstitial pneumonias with a clinical pattern not compatible with usual interstitial pneuminia. But until the results of such studies are available, including adequate control groups, surgical lung biopsies should be considered as the gold standard for diagnosing idiopathic interstitial pneumonias, except for typical cases of usual interstitial pneuminia fulfilling the established clinical and high-resolution computed tomography criteria 4.

    • © ERS Journals Ltd

    References

    1. ↵
      American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society International Multidisciplinary Consensus Classification of the Idiopathic Interstitial Pneumonias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;165:277–304.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    2. Katzenstein A-L, Myers JL. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Clinical relevance of pathological calssification. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998;157:1301–1315.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    3. ↵
      Johnston ID, Gomm SA, Kalra S, Woodcock AA, Evans CC, Hind CR. The management of cryptogenic fibrosing alveolitis in three regions of the United Kindom. Eur Respir J 1993;6:891–893.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    4. ↵
      ATS/ERS Interational Consensus Statement. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: diagnosis and treatment. Am J Respir Crit Car Med 2000;161:646–664.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    5. ↵
      Raghu G, Mageto YN, Lockhart D, Schmidt RA, Wood DE, Godwin JD. The accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of new-onset idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and other interstitial lung diseases: a prospective study. Chest 1999;116:1168–1174.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    6. Hunninghake GW, Zimmermann MB, Schwartz DA, et al. Utility of a lung biopsy for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001;164:193–196.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    7. ↵
      Müller NL, Miller RR, Webb WR, Evans KG, Ostrow DN. Fibrosing alveolitis: CT-pathologic correlations. Radiology 1986;160:585–588.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    8. Bergin CJ, Müler NL. CT of interstitial lung disease: a diagnostic approach. Am J Roentgenol 1987;148:9–15.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    9. Tung KT, Wells AU, Rubens MB, Kirk JM, du Bois RM, Hansell DM. Accuracy of the typical computed tomographic appearances of fibrosing alveolitis. Thorax 1993;48:334–338.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    10. ↵
      Daniil ZD, Gilchrist FC, Nicholson AG, et al. A histologic pattern of nonspecific interstitial pneumonia is associated with a better prognosis than usual interstitial pneumonia in patients with cryptogenic fibrosing alveolitis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999;160:899–905.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    11. ↵
      Watanabe K, Higuchi K, Ninomiya K, et al. Steroid treatment based on the findings of transbronchial biopsy in idiopathic interstitial pneumonia. Eur Respir J 2002;20:1213–1219.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    View this article with LENS
    Vol 20 Issue 5 Table of Contents
    • Table of Contents
    • Index by author
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Is “nonusual interstitial pneumonia” an acceptable diagnosis?
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Print
    Citation Tools
    Is “nonusual interstitial pneumonia” an acceptable diagnosis?
    J. Behr
    European Respiratory Journal Nov 2002, 20 (5) 1069-1070; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.02.00405902

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero

    Share
    Is “nonusual interstitial pneumonia” an acceptable diagnosis?
    J. Behr
    European Respiratory Journal Nov 2002, 20 (5) 1069-1070; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.02.00405902
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    Full Text (PDF)

    Jump To

    • Article
      • References
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    More in this TOC Section

    • All roads lead to COPD… or not?
    • Insights in the biology of IL-33 and relevance for COPD
    • Sotatercept, haemodynamics and the right ventricle
    Show more Editorials

    Related Articles

    Navigate

    • Home
    • Current issue
    • Archive

    About the ERJ

    • Journal information
    • Editorial board
    • Press
    • Permissions and reprints
    • Advertising

    The European Respiratory Society

    • Society home
    • myERS
    • Privacy policy
    • Accessibility

    ERS publications

    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS books online
    • ERS Bookshop

    Help

    • Feedback

    For authors

    • Instructions for authors
    • Publication ethics and malpractice
    • Submit a manuscript

    For readers

    • Alerts
    • Subjects
    • Podcasts
    • RSS

    Subscriptions

    • Accessing the ERS publications

    Contact us

    European Respiratory Society
    442 Glossop Road
    Sheffield S10 2PX
    United Kingdom
    Tel: +44 114 2672860
    Email: journals@ersnet.org

    ISSN

    Print ISSN:  0903-1936
    Online ISSN: 1399-3003

    Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society