RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: There are currently no established markers for aspiration pneumonia. We hypothesized that bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) amylase and pepsin might be candidate biomarkers for aspiration pneumonia. METHODS: This cross-sectional study reviewed consenting adults who underwent clinically-indicated bronchoscopy at Aizu Medical Center. BAL samples were obtained using standardized methods. Amylase levels were measured in our clinical laboratory, and pepsin levels were assessed by ELISA. RESULTS: Aspiration pneumonia was clinically diagnosed based on the guidelines of the Japanese Respiratory Society in 48 of the 327 participants. Median BAL salivary amylase and pepsin levels in this group were 702.0 U/L and 12.7 ng/ml respectively, which were significantly higher than in non-aspiration pneumonia patients. BAL amylase ≥204 U/L had 77.1% sensitivity and 84.2% specificity as a diagnostic index, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.859 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.803-0.915). Similarly, BAL pepsin levels of ≥7.45 ng/ml had 87.2% sensitivity and 59.9% specificity for identifying aspiration, and the area under the ROC curve was 0.757 (95% CI, 0.688-0.826). Multivariate regression demonstrated that BAL amylase ≥204 U/L and BAL pepsin ≥7.45 ng/ml were associated with significantly higher odds for aspiration pneumonia (odds ratio (OR) 10.0, 95% CI, 4.51-22.2, and OR 8.81 95% CI, 3.32-23.4, respectively). There were no significant associations between risk factors for aspiration pneumonia and BAL amylase and pepsin levels. CONCLUSION: BAL amylase and pepsin might be useful biomarkers for suggesting aspiration pneumonia, and could be objective markers without relying on known risk factors for aspiration.
RESUMEN
A 57-year-old man was admitted with a type 2 (ulcerated with clear margin) cancer in the cecum. Contrast-enhanced CT showed that the superior mesenteric vein was anterior to the superior mesenteric artery, and the patient was suspected of having intestinal malrotation. A laparoscopic-assisted ileocecal resection was performed. At operation, the cecum and the transverse colon passed through the root of the mesentery behind the superior mesenteric artery with the duodenum. Therefore, this was thought to be a reversed-type intestinal malrotation. After the operation, 3D-CT colonography with duodenography images were reconstructed to retrospectively confirm the diagnosis of a reversed malrotation. These images clearly demonstrated the abnormal anatomy and overall orientation of the intestine. Patients with a reversed intestinal malrotation and concurrent cecal cancer are extremely rare. Herein, we present a patient who underwent a laparoscopic-assisted ileocecal resection for cecal cancer that presented concurrently with a reversed intestinal malrotation.
