Pneumonia adquirida na comunidade em pacientes tratados ambulatorialmente: aspectos epidemiológicos, clínicos e radiológicos das pneumonias atípicas e não atípicas

• Autor(a) principal: Rocha, Rosali Teixeira [UNIFESP]
• Data de Publicação: 2000
• Outros Autores: Vital, Anna Cristina [UNIFESP], Silva, Clystenes Odyr Soares [UNIFESP], Pereira, Carlos Alberto de Castro [UNIFESP], Nakatani, Jorge [UNIFESP]
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
• Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-35862000000100003; http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/914
• topic: pneumonia; etiology; diagnosis; epidemiology; pneumonia; etiologia; diagnóstico; epidemiologia

Aim: To evaluated the etiologic percentage of the atypical pneumoniae in outpatients and to identify the epidemiologic, clinical and radiographic features that permit to distinguish between atypical and non-atypical pneumonia. Methods: All patients underwent clinical and radiographic evaluation. Serum and sputum samples were obtained to serological tests including Legionella sp, Chlamydia sp, M. pneumoniae, Influenza A and Influenza B virus, and Gram stain, respectively. These procedures were performed on the first and 21 days after inclusion. Three independent observers reviewed chest X-rays. Results: During 22 months, 129 patients were evaluated. The final population under study comprised 69 patients (46 men ¾ 23 women) with a mean age of 37 years. The etiologic diagnosis was defined in 34 (50%) of the patients. Etiologic agents included Chlamydia sp, 11 (16%) isolated cases; M. pneumoniae 7 (10%) cases. Influenza A was the third more frequent agent in 4 (6%) patients, and Legionella sp in 4 (6%). Mixed infections were observed with association of Chlamydia sp and M. pneumoniae in 5 (7.3%) cases, Chlamydia sp and Influenza B one (1.5%) case, and another of M. pneumoniae and Influenza A. The atypical pneumonia and non-atypical pneumonia groups were compared to respiratory symptoms and signs. There were no differences between them. The three independent observers' radiographic evaluation showed disagreement among them as to the type of pneumonia. Radiographic diagnoses of individual observers were compared to the clinical diagnoses, and no significant association was obtained for any observer. Conclusion: Pneumonia caused by atypical agents occurs in 50% of the outpatients with community acquired pneumonia. It is not possible to distinguish atypical pneumonia from non-atypical pneumonia. The clinical and radiographic presentations are similar in both groups.