Morné J. Vorster

Tuberculous pleural effusions: advances and controversies

On a global scale, tuberculosis (TB) remains one of the most frequent causes of pleural effusions. Our understanding of the pathogenesis of the disease has evolved and what was once thought to be an effusion as a result of a pure delayed hypersensitivity reaction is now believed to be the consequence of direct infection of the pleural space with a cascade of events including an immunological response. Pulmonary involvement is more common than previously believed and induced sputum, which is grossly underutilised, can be diagnostic in approximately 50%. The gold standard for the diagnosis of tuberculous pleuritis remains the detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in pleural fluid, or pleural biopsy specimens, either by microscopy and/or culture, or the histological demonstration of caseating granulomas in the pleura along with acid fast bacilli (AFB). In high burden settings, however, the diagnosis is frequently inferred in patients who present with a lymphocytic predominant exudate and a high adenosine deaminase (ADA) level, which is a valuable adjunct in the diagnostic evaluation. ADA is generally readily accessible, and together with lymphocyte predominance justifies treatment initiation in patients with a high pre-test probability. Still, false-negative and false-positive results remain an issue. When adding closed pleural biopsy to ADA and lymphocyte count, diagnostic accuracy approaches that of thoracoscopy. The role of other biomarkers is less well described. Early pleural drainage may have a role in selected cases, but more research is required to validate its use and to define the subpopulation that may benefit from such interventions.

Clinical relevance of genomic signatures of type 2 inflammation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

[3] reported on a ‘COPD-like’ small airway epithelial transcriptome; by identifying differentially expressed genes they could classify clinically healthy smokers into subgroups with lesser and greater responses to cigarette smoking. Following these results, whole-genome gene expression profiling done on bronchial biopsies from COPD patients treated with inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in the GLUCOLD study, [4] showed

Endoscopic lung volume reduction in severe emphysema

Therapeutic options in severe emphysema are limited. Endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) refers to bronchoscopically inducing volume loss to improve pulmonary mechanics and compliance, thereby reducing the work of breathing. Globally, this technique is increasingly used as treatment for advanced emphysema with the aim of obtaining similar functional advantages to surgical lung volume reduction, while reducing risks and costs. There is a growing body of evidence that certain well-defined subgroups of patients with advanced emphysema benefit from ELVR, provided that a systematic approach is followed and selection criteria are met. In addition to endobronchial valves, ELVR using endobronchial coils is now available in South Africa. The high cost of these interventions underscores the need for careful patient selection to best identify those likely to benefit from such procedures.

Recommendations for the use of endoscopic lung volume reduction in South Africa: Role in the treatment of emphysema.

Emphysema is a very common cause of morbidity and mortality in South Africa (SA). Therapeutic options in severe emphysema are limited. Endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) is increasingly being used internationally for the treatment of advanced emphysema in a subset of patients with advanced disease, aiming to obtain the same functional advantages as surgical lung volume reduction while reducing risks and costs. In addition to endobronchial valves, ELVR using endobronchial coils is now available in SA. The high cost of these interventions underscores the need for careful patient selection to best identify those who may or may not benefit from ELVR-related procedures. The Assembly on Interventional Pulmonology of the South African Thoracic Society appointed a committee comprising both local and international experts to extensively review all relevant evidence and provide advice on the use of ELVR in SA based on published evidence, expert opinion and local access to the various devices.