TY - JOUR
T1 - The inflamed sputum in lower respiratory tract infection
T2 - l-lactate levels are correlated to neutrophil accumulation
AU - Fredman, Gabriella
AU - Kolpen, Mette
AU - Hertz, Frederik Boetius
AU - Petersen, Pelle Trier
AU - Jensen, Andreas Vestergaard
AU - Baunbæk-Egelund, Gertrud
AU - Ravn, Pernille
AU - Jensen, Peter Østrup
AU - Faurholt-Jepsen, Daniel
PY - 2019/2/1
Y1 - 2019/2/1
N2 - Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) are common, but little is known about the response of biomarkers of inflammation in the lungs. Therefore, our primary aim was to compare the concentration of l-lactate to the concentration of neutrophils in sputum and systemic markers of infection. Because it is difficult to differentiate viral and bacterial infection on the basis of clinical presentation in LRTI, our secondary aim was to evaluate if l- and d-lactate may serve as markers of local inflammation as representatives of neutrophils and bacteria, respectively. Methods: Patients with acute LRTI were prospectively recruited. Sputum samples were collected and analysed for neutrophil count, l-lactate and d-lactate. We had data on pathogens from sputum cultures and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (atypical bacteria, virus) and C-reactive protein (CRP) from blood. Results: In 44 sputum samples from 32 patients, the median (interquartile range (IQR)) sputum neutrophil granulocyte count was 0.615 × 107 cells/mL (0.236–1.575). The sputum neutrophil granulocyte count was associated with sputum l-lactate (p = 0.011) and CRP (p = 0.018), but not with d-lactate (p = 0.177). There was a strong association between sputum d-lactate and l-lactate (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: As l-lactate in sputum is closely correlated to sequestration of neutrophils in the lungs, l-lactate is a marker for local inflammation in LRTI and a potential biomarker in clinical management of LRTI. On expectorated sputum, d-lactate had no clinical relevance.
AB - Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) are common, but little is known about the response of biomarkers of inflammation in the lungs. Therefore, our primary aim was to compare the concentration of l-lactate to the concentration of neutrophils in sputum and systemic markers of infection. Because it is difficult to differentiate viral and bacterial infection on the basis of clinical presentation in LRTI, our secondary aim was to evaluate if l- and d-lactate may serve as markers of local inflammation as representatives of neutrophils and bacteria, respectively. Methods: Patients with acute LRTI were prospectively recruited. Sputum samples were collected and analysed for neutrophil count, l-lactate and d-lactate. We had data on pathogens from sputum cultures and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (atypical bacteria, virus) and C-reactive protein (CRP) from blood. Results: In 44 sputum samples from 32 patients, the median (interquartile range (IQR)) sputum neutrophil granulocyte count was 0.615 × 107 cells/mL (0.236–1.575). The sputum neutrophil granulocyte count was associated with sputum l-lactate (p = 0.011) and CRP (p = 0.018), but not with d-lactate (p = 0.177). There was a strong association between sputum d-lactate and l-lactate (p < 0.0001). Conclusion: As l-lactate in sputum is closely correlated to sequestration of neutrophils in the lungs, l-lactate is a marker for local inflammation in LRTI and a potential biomarker in clinical management of LRTI. On expectorated sputum, d-lactate had no clinical relevance.
KW - lower respiratory tract infections
KW - lung infections
KW - sputum d-lactate
KW - sputum l-lactate
KW - sputum neutrophil granulocytes
U2 - 10.1111/apm.12913
DO - 10.1111/apm.12913
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 30614067
AN - SCOPUS:85059569731
SN - 0903-465X
VL - 127
SP - 72
EP - 79
JO - APMIS. Supplementum
JF - APMIS. Supplementum
IS - 2
ER -