Could a defective epithelial sodium channel lead to bronchiectasis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Bronchiectasis is defined as a permanent dilation of the airways arising from chronic bronchial inflammation/infection. In 50% of cases, no etiology can be identified. Recently, the role of the epithelial sodium channel ENaC has been pointed out in the pathophysiology of cystic fibrosis, a disease due to mutations in the <it>CFTR </it>gene and causing bronchiectasis in the airways. Moreover, it was found that transgenic mice overexpressing <it>ENaCβ </it>present cystic fibrosis-like lung disease symptoms. Our aim was to evaluate if a defective ENaC protein could be involved in the development of bronchiectasis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We extensively analysed <it>ENaCβ </it>and <it>γ </it>genes in 55 patients with idiopathic bronchiectasis and without two mutations in the coding regions of <it>CFTR</it>. Thirty-eight patients presented functional abnormalities suggesting impaired sodium transport (abnormal sweat chloride concentration or nasal potential difference measurement), and 17 had no such evidence.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Sequencing of the exons and flanking introns of the <it>ENaCβ </it>and <it>γ </it>gene identified five different amino-acid changes (p.Ser82Cys, p.Pro369Thr, p.Asn288Ser in <it>ENaCβ </it>; and p.Gly183Ser, p.Glu197Lys in <it>ENaCγ</it>) in heterozygous state in 8 patients. The p.Ser82Cys amino-acid change was found in 3 unrelated patients who were also heterozygous for a <it>CFTR </it>mutation or variant (1 p.F508del, 1 IVS8-5T, and 1 IVS8-5T:1716G>A (p.E528E)). The other mutations were found in patients without <it>CFTR </it>mutation, the p.Glu197Lys mutation in 2 patients and the other variants in single patients. Among the 8 patients bearing an <it>ENaC </it>mutation, 5 had functional abnormalities suggesting impaired sodium transport.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our results suggest that several variants in <it>ENaCβ </it>and <it>γ </it>genes might be deleterious for ENaC function and lead to bronchiectasis, especially in patients who are trans-heterozygotes for <it>ENaCβ/CFTR </it>mutations or variants.</p

The effect of watchful waiting compared to immediate test ordering instructions on general practitioners' blood test ordering behaviour for patients with unexplained complaints; a randomized clinical trial (ISRCTN55755886)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Immediate blood testing for patients presenting with unexplained complaints in family practice is superfluous from a diagnostic point of view. However, many general pracitioners (GPs) order tests immediately. Watchful waiting reduces the number of patients to be tested and the number of false-positive results. The objectives of this study are: to determine the feasibility of watchful waiting compared to immediate test ordering; to determine if a special quality improvement strategy can improve this feasibility; and to determine if watchful waiting leads to testing at a later time.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study is a cluster-randomized clinical trial with three groups, on blood test ordering strategies in patients with unexplained complaints. GPs in group one were instructed to order tests immediately and GPs in group two to apply a watchful waiting approach. GPs in group three received the same instruction as group two, but they were supported by a systematically designed quality improvement strategy. A total of 498 patients with unexplained complaints from 63 practices of Dutch GPs participated. We measured: the percentage of patients for whom tests were ordered and number of tests ordered at the first consultation; performance on the strategy's performance objectives (i.e., ordering fewer tests and specific communication skills); the number of tests ordered after four weeks; and GP and patient characteristics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Immediate test ordering proved feasible in 92% of the patients; watchful waiting in 86% and 84%, respectively, for groups two and three. The two watchful waiting groups did not differ significantly in the achievement of any of the performance objectives. Of the patients who returned after four weeks, none from group one and six from the two watchful waiting groups had tests ordered for them.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Watchful waiting is a feasible approach. It does not lead to testing immediately afterwards. Furthermore, watchful waiting was not improved by the quality improvement strategy.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Clinical trial registration: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN55755886">ISRCTN55755886</a></p