The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Protected Bronchoalveolar Lavage: A New Bronchoscopic Technique to Retrieve Uncontaminated Distal Airway Secretions
Abstract
We tested the effectiveness of protected bronchoalveolar lavage (PBAL), performed through a protected transbronchoscopic balloon-tipped (PBT) catheter, in collecting distal airway secretions with a minimal degree of contamination. The PBAL had less than or equal to 1% squamous epithelial cells in 91% of specimens and an absence of bacterial growth in 59% of patients without pneumonia. Using a threshold of 10(4) cfu/ml we had one false positive result in 33 patient without pneumonia and one false negative in 13 patients with pneumonia. Quantitative bacterial cultures of the PBAL specimens had a diagnostic sensitivity of 97% and a specificity of 92%, with a positive predictive value of 97% and a negative predictive value of 92%. The diagnostic efficiency was 96%. The presence of intracellular organisms in much greater than or equal to 2% of the recovered alveolar cells (Giemsa stain) was seen in all but two patients with pneumonia (on corticosteroids) and in none of the patients without pneumonia. Gram stains of the PBAL specimens were positive in all but one patient with pneumonia and negative in all but one patient without infection (patient with endobronchial narrowing secondary to neoplasm with false positive cultures). Either the Giemsa or the Gram stain was positive in all patients with pneumonia, allowing early and accurate diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infection before the results of cultures were available. The time off antibiotic therapy before bronchoscopy did not affect the result of PBAL cultures, contrary to what we observed for the protected brush specimen.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Impact of BAL Data on the Therapy and Outcome of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia
Luna, C. M., Vujacich, P., Niederman, M. S., Vay, C., Gherardi, C., Matera, J., & Jolly, E. C. (1997) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.111.3.676 · Cited by 916
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia
(2012) · SpringerReference · doi:10.1007/springerreference_225126 · Cited by 406
Meduri, G. U., Mauldin, G. L., Wunderink, R. G., Leeper, K. V., Jones, C. B., Tolley, E., & Mayhall, G. (1994) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.106.1.221 · Cited by 339
Self-citationMarquette, C. H., Copin, M. C., Wallet, F., Neviere, R., Saulnier, F., Mathieu, D., Durocher, A., Ramon, P., & Tonnel, A. B. (1995) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.151.6.7767535 · Cited by 334
Incidence of anaerobes in ventilator-associated pneumonia with use of a protected specimen brush.
Doré, P., Robert, R., Grollier, G., Rouffineau, J., Lanquetot, H., Charrière, J. M., & Fauchère, J. L. (1996) · American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1164/ajrccm.153.4.8616556 · Cited by 129
Metadata
- Authors
- Meduri, G. U., Beals, D. H., Maijub, A. G., & Baselski, V.
- Venue
- American Review of Respiratory Disease
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1991-04
- Volume
- 143
- Issue
- 4_pt_1
- Pages
- 855-864
- ISSN
- 0003-0805 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2041551118
- Cited by
- 182
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 17.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Protected Bronchoalveolar Lavage: A New Bronchoscopic Technique to Retrieve Uncontaminated Distal Airway Secretions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/ajrccm/143.4_pt_1.855
- The paper
- Meduri, G. U., Beals, D. H., Maijub, A. G., & Baselski, V. (1991). Protected Bronchoalveolar Lavage: A New Bronchoscopic Technique to Retrieve Uncontaminated Distal Airway Secretions. American Review of Respiratory Disease. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/143.4_pt_1.855
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.