DIAGNOSTIC VALUE OF
SPUTUM INDUCTION
Dr. Anirban Dutta
2nd year PG
“Things don’t happen .They are made
to happen”- JOHN F. KENNEDY
Introduction
 Non invasive tool in diagnosing
◦ Occupational asthma
◦ COPD
◦ Lung cancer
◦ ILDS
◦ TB
◦ Opportunistic infections
Advantages :
Non invasive
Simple
Safe
Economical
Easily available
Acceptable to most of the patients
Repeatable and Reproducible
Serve in monitoring of course and therapy
Methods
 Sputum induction is done with
◦ Normal saline
◦ Hypertonic saline
◦ Uridine Triphosphate
Using a Ultrasonic Nebulizer with a output of
1ml/min.
 Prerequisites
◦ Written informed consent
◦ Using baseline FEV1 or PEFR
◦ Pretreatment with 200-400gm of salbutamol
inhalation prior to induction
 Use of Beta 2 agonists for sputum
induction is also documented
 FEV1,PEFR fall>20% - STOP
Procedure
SAMPLE PROCESSING
 Processed within 2hrs
 Can be stored at -20°C or -40°C in
dimethyl sulfoxide solution .
 Fluid phase mediators can be estimated
even to <18hrs of sputum induction
 Total cell count is done before
centrifugation using a hemocytometer.
 Cell viability is determined
by a triptan blue exclusion method
 Differential count by Wright’s or Giemsa
stain for Eosinophils,
Neutrophils,macrophages, lymphocytes
and bronchial epithelial cells
 Toluidine blue - mast cells and basophils.
 Results have better contrast when staining
time is increased from 10 mins to 60
minutes
 Immunocytochemical staining further
 Results differ from Selected sputum
and Unselected Sputum
 It also differs from the use of
◦ Dithiothreitol
◦ Delayed processing of the sputum
◦ Effect of temperature
◦ Dilution
◦ Filtration and centrifugation
 Standardization is very important for
uniformity of results
Bronchial Asthma
 Discrepancies and lack of correlation
with histological changes and various
investigations such as Bronchoscopic
findings ,FEV1/PEFR repeat Biopsies
and airways Hyperresponsiveness have
given place to SPUTUM INDUCTION to
evaluate and assess airway
inflammation.
 Elevated Eosinophilic count of 3%
provides a clue for the asthma in 80% &
50% of patients with or without inhaled
corticosteriods respectively.
 Thus eosinophilic count can help in
◦ evaluation of therapeutic measures i.e
persistence of eosinophils shows either non
compliance or acute exacerbation
◦ Requiring to either increase the dose of
inhalation of corticosteroids
◦ Addition of another anti inflammatory drug
 Neutrophilia warrants an attack by viral
infection
 In children , sputum eosinophilia also
well correlates with bronchial hyper-
Responsiveness and severity
◦ Sputum induction is safer in ChildHood
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary
Disease
 Neutrophilic inflammation plays a major
role in inferring presence of infection in
COPD
 Activation of neutrophil signifies Clinical
Improvement
 Occurrence of eosinophilia in induced
sputum in patients of COPD indicates
requirement of Inhalational steroids
◦ Thus can be used as predictor of response to
steroid therapy.
Pulmonary Tuberculosis
 Preferred method over gastric lavage in
Children
 Useful in dry coughers and smear negative
cases
 It can be used for infants and children
from HIV prevalent areas
 Smear + for AFB increases by 29% with
sputum induction and results are better
with 1st day.
 It increases case detection rate of smear –
ve Pulmonary TB as well as smear +ve
pulm. TB
Pneumocystis Carini
Pneumonia
 Sputum induction is
◦ sensitive
◦ Specific
◦ Low cost
◦ Well tolerated method in
immunocompromised patient to diagnose
pneumnocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP)
in HIV positive patients
LUNG CANCER
 Cytological diagnostic yield by sputum
induction in the central growth as well
as lung in the elderly is almost 74%
 The diagnostic technique utilized
include
◦ Specific oncogene activation
◦ Tumor supressor cell deletion
◦ Genomic instabilty
◦ Abnormal methylation
Community Acquired
Pneumonia
 Nebulization technique using Hypertonic
saline is preferred in children as
recommended by PNEUMONIA
ETILOGY RESEARCH FOR CHILD
HEALTH (PERCH)in children
hospitalized with severe pneumonia
provided no C/I exists
Cystic Fibrosis
 To find infection and inflammation is more
useful in cases with less sputum
production
 This procedure is more preferable over
BAL
 Advantages :
◦ 2 fold increase in sputum production
◦ Escalated indices of inflammation  TLC ,
absolute neutrophil count , interleukin levels &
neutrophil elastase activity
◦ A large number of non squamous cells and
higher detection rate of pathogens & colony
counts to diagnose CF as compared to
Sputum Induction :
FUTUROLOGY
 It should be routinely suggested for
Nonproductive cough
 In sarcoidosis also it is of CHOICE –
diagnostic method of BAL with
fiberoptic bronchoscope are well
correlated with CD4: CD8 ratio and
levels of tumor necrosis factor in
induced sputum both in pre and post
treatment.
 Cellular characteristics and presence
of mineralogenical particles in induced
sputum can also offer help in diagnosis
and assesment of patients with mineral
dust exposure and extrinsic alveolitis
 In obtaining diagnostic yields of
◦ lipid laden macrophages in GERD
◦ Hemosiderin laden macrophages in Left
ventricular failure
 Sputum induction can offer high
diagnostic yield in pleural TB when
there is no evidence of parenchymal
pulmonary disease
Conclusion
 Requires standardization, trained
technicians and back up support of
laboratory analysis of microbiological ,
biochemical and Histopathological
Evaluation
 New window in diagnosing and assesing
various lung disaeases and disorders
 Neverthless it requires a proposal for
protocol for future directions.
 We also need to identify the reason for
underuse of this technique
THANK YOU

Diagnostic value of sputum induction in respiratory disorders dr anirban dutta

  • 1.
    DIAGNOSTIC VALUE OF SPUTUMINDUCTION Dr. Anirban Dutta 2nd year PG
  • 2.
    “Things don’t happen.They are made to happen”- JOHN F. KENNEDY
  • 3.
    Introduction  Non invasivetool in diagnosing ◦ Occupational asthma ◦ COPD ◦ Lung cancer ◦ ILDS ◦ TB ◦ Opportunistic infections
  • 4.
    Advantages : Non invasive Simple Safe Economical Easilyavailable Acceptable to most of the patients Repeatable and Reproducible Serve in monitoring of course and therapy
  • 5.
    Methods  Sputum inductionis done with ◦ Normal saline ◦ Hypertonic saline ◦ Uridine Triphosphate Using a Ultrasonic Nebulizer with a output of 1ml/min.  Prerequisites ◦ Written informed consent ◦ Using baseline FEV1 or PEFR ◦ Pretreatment with 200-400gm of salbutamol inhalation prior to induction
  • 6.
     Use ofBeta 2 agonists for sputum induction is also documented  FEV1,PEFR fall>20% - STOP Procedure
  • 7.
    SAMPLE PROCESSING  Processedwithin 2hrs  Can be stored at -20°C or -40°C in dimethyl sulfoxide solution .  Fluid phase mediators can be estimated even to <18hrs of sputum induction  Total cell count is done before centrifugation using a hemocytometer.  Cell viability is determined by a triptan blue exclusion method
  • 9.
     Differential countby Wright’s or Giemsa stain for Eosinophils, Neutrophils,macrophages, lymphocytes and bronchial epithelial cells  Toluidine blue - mast cells and basophils.  Results have better contrast when staining time is increased from 10 mins to 60 minutes  Immunocytochemical staining further
  • 10.
     Results differfrom Selected sputum and Unselected Sputum  It also differs from the use of ◦ Dithiothreitol ◦ Delayed processing of the sputum ◦ Effect of temperature ◦ Dilution ◦ Filtration and centrifugation  Standardization is very important for uniformity of results
  • 11.
    Bronchial Asthma  Discrepanciesand lack of correlation with histological changes and various investigations such as Bronchoscopic findings ,FEV1/PEFR repeat Biopsies and airways Hyperresponsiveness have given place to SPUTUM INDUCTION to evaluate and assess airway inflammation.  Elevated Eosinophilic count of 3% provides a clue for the asthma in 80% & 50% of patients with or without inhaled corticosteriods respectively.
  • 12.
     Thus eosinophiliccount can help in ◦ evaluation of therapeutic measures i.e persistence of eosinophils shows either non compliance or acute exacerbation ◦ Requiring to either increase the dose of inhalation of corticosteroids ◦ Addition of another anti inflammatory drug  Neutrophilia warrants an attack by viral infection  In children , sputum eosinophilia also well correlates with bronchial hyper- Responsiveness and severity ◦ Sputum induction is safer in ChildHood
  • 13.
    Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Neutrophilic inflammation plays a major role in inferring presence of infection in COPD  Activation of neutrophil signifies Clinical Improvement  Occurrence of eosinophilia in induced sputum in patients of COPD indicates requirement of Inhalational steroids ◦ Thus can be used as predictor of response to steroid therapy.
  • 14.
    Pulmonary Tuberculosis  Preferredmethod over gastric lavage in Children  Useful in dry coughers and smear negative cases  It can be used for infants and children from HIV prevalent areas  Smear + for AFB increases by 29% with sputum induction and results are better with 1st day.  It increases case detection rate of smear – ve Pulmonary TB as well as smear +ve pulm. TB
  • 15.
    Pneumocystis Carini Pneumonia  Sputuminduction is ◦ sensitive ◦ Specific ◦ Low cost ◦ Well tolerated method in immunocompromised patient to diagnose pneumnocystis carinii pneumonia (PCP) in HIV positive patients
  • 16.
    LUNG CANCER  Cytologicaldiagnostic yield by sputum induction in the central growth as well as lung in the elderly is almost 74%  The diagnostic technique utilized include ◦ Specific oncogene activation ◦ Tumor supressor cell deletion ◦ Genomic instabilty ◦ Abnormal methylation
  • 17.
    Community Acquired Pneumonia  Nebulizationtechnique using Hypertonic saline is preferred in children as recommended by PNEUMONIA ETILOGY RESEARCH FOR CHILD HEALTH (PERCH)in children hospitalized with severe pneumonia provided no C/I exists
  • 18.
    Cystic Fibrosis  Tofind infection and inflammation is more useful in cases with less sputum production  This procedure is more preferable over BAL  Advantages : ◦ 2 fold increase in sputum production ◦ Escalated indices of inflammation  TLC , absolute neutrophil count , interleukin levels & neutrophil elastase activity ◦ A large number of non squamous cells and higher detection rate of pathogens & colony counts to diagnose CF as compared to
  • 19.
    Sputum Induction : FUTUROLOGY It should be routinely suggested for Nonproductive cough  In sarcoidosis also it is of CHOICE – diagnostic method of BAL with fiberoptic bronchoscope are well correlated with CD4: CD8 ratio and levels of tumor necrosis factor in induced sputum both in pre and post treatment.
  • 20.
     Cellular characteristicsand presence of mineralogenical particles in induced sputum can also offer help in diagnosis and assesment of patients with mineral dust exposure and extrinsic alveolitis  In obtaining diagnostic yields of ◦ lipid laden macrophages in GERD ◦ Hemosiderin laden macrophages in Left ventricular failure  Sputum induction can offer high diagnostic yield in pleural TB when there is no evidence of parenchymal pulmonary disease
  • 21.
    Conclusion  Requires standardization,trained technicians and back up support of laboratory analysis of microbiological , biochemical and Histopathological Evaluation  New window in diagnosing and assesing various lung disaeases and disorders  Neverthless it requires a proposal for protocol for future directions.  We also need to identify the reason for underuse of this technique
  • 22.