MÆDICA - a Journal of Clinical Medicine Logo
  • Home
  • Profile
  • Standards
    • Types of articles
    • Instructions for authors
    • Editing rules (peer-review protocol)
    • Official Journal’s protocols
  • Editorial Council
  • Peer-review TEAM
  • How to
  • Menu

Author archives

  • About
  • Latest Posts

Negar HOSSEINZADEH

Latest posts by Negar HOSSEINZADEH (see all)

  • Eosinopenia as a Marker of Outcome in Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease - June 16, 2015

Articles signed on MÆDICA, JCM:

Eosinopenia as a Marker of Outcome in Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

SELECT ISSUE

MÆDICA - a Journal of Clinical Medicine | Vol. 10, nr. 1, 2015

CNCSIS - CMR - B+ OBBCSSR

Eosinopenia as a Marker of Outcome in Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Mohammad Hossein RAHIMI-RAD, Behzad ASGARI, Negar HOSSEINZADEH and Ali EISHI

ABSTRACT

Background: Acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is a common cause of hospitalization and mortality. Recent studies have shown the usefulness of eosinopenia in predicting the outcomes of patients admitted to the intensive care unit. This study examined the association of eosinopenia with the outcomes of patients with AECOPD.

Methods: This is a prospective study. Patients with AECOPD were divided into two cohorts: patients with eosinopenia and those without eosinopenia. Duration of hospitalization, need of mechanical ventilation, in-hospital mortality, rehospitalization, or death within 30 days after discharge were compared between the two cohorts. Eosinopenia was defined as eosinophil count of >40 cells/mm3 .

Results: Among 100 patients with AECOPD, 44 were eosinopenic and 56 were non-eosinopenic. Duration of hospitalization of patients with eosinopenia was 12.38 ± 9.85 days and that of patients without eosinopenia was 7.35 ± 5.68 days (p = 0.001). In all, 16 (36%) patients with eosinopenia and seven (12%) patients without eosinopenia needed mechanical ventilation (p = 0.005). In-hospital mortality rate among eosinopenic and noneosinopenic patients was 37.5% (12/44) and 7.6% (4/56), respectively (p = 0.006). Among 100 patients with AECOPD, 16 died in the hospital. Of these, 12 (27.27%) were eosinopenic and 4 (7.6%) were noneosinopenic (p = 0.006). The mean eosinophil count of patients who died in the hospital (n = 16) was 44.00 cells/ml whereas that of survivors (n = 84) was 107.41 cells/ml (p = 0.022).

Conclusion: We conclude that a significant relationship exists between eosinopenia and outcomes of patients with AECOPD. Thus, eosinopenia can be a useful, easy-to-measure, and inexpensive biomarker for predicting the prognosis of patients with AECOPD.

Full text | PDF



plic-mail[email protected]

 Terms and conditions

© MÆDICA - a Journal of Clinical Medicine - All rights reserved