Talk:Allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis

What does this mean, internet?

The following sentence is grammatically incomplete:

The subsequent damage to the bronchial wall caused by proteolytic enzymes released by the immune cells and toxins released by the fungi results in bronchiectasis, most pronounced in the central parts of the airways.

It is missing a linking verb, and since I did not write it, I can hardly know where the linking verb should go. I would assume it's a missing "is" to replace the comma, but that's not the only possibility. --75.63.55.31 (talk) 01:36, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Inconsistency

Is APBA a type of eosinophilic pneumonia or not? In the intro paragraph it seems that it only resembles an eosinophilic pneumonia, later it says it is an eosinophlic pneumonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.88.83.56 (talk) 02:50, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Eosinophilic pneumonia is a symptom of ABPA; ABPA is not a type of pneumonia, it is a hypersensitivity disorder. --—Cyclonenim | Chat  16:08, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Pathophysiology review

I shall review the "Pathophysiology" section. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

From paragraph 1: "various immune cells (notably alveolar macrophages, dendritic cells and granulocytes—especially neutrophils)." Perhaps rephrase this: "various immune cells (notably neutrophils, alveolar macrophages and dendritic cells)." Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:26, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

From paragraph 2: "In people with predisposing disease—such as persistent asthma or cystic fibrosis, and rarely other diseases such as chronic granulomatous disease or Hyper-IgE syndrome." Does this mean that people with chronic granulomatous disease or Hyper-IgE syndrome rarely get ABPA, or does it mean that people with ABPA rarely have chronic granulomatous disease/Hyper-IgE? (I know the answer, but this needs to be clarified.) It may be better just to mention that the presence of underlying lung diseases such as asthma and CF are strong risk factors for the development of ABPA. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:30, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

There is too much use of the word "various": once in paragraph 1, twice in paragraph 2. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:33, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

From paragraph 3: "Immune complexes (a type III reaction) and inflammatory cells are then deposited within the mucous membranes of the airways." Use of the word "then" implies that these complexes are a result of the mechanism in the preceding sentence: IgE-mediated type I hypersensitivity. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

From paragraph 3: "Type 2 T helper cells secreting interleukin (IL) 4 and IL-5 appear to play an important role." This somewhat vague. What is this "important role"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:51, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

From paragraph 4: "This induces further injury to respiratory epithelia proteases released by both the fungus and neutrophils." There is some sort of disconnect in this statement. Axl ¤ [Talk] 14:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I have finished my review of the section. Overall, the article needs quite a bit of work to bring it up to GA standard. I recommend the use of two or three authoritative textbooks such as Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine and Fishman's Pulmonary Diseases and Disorders. The "References" section should be deleted, especially the books from 1988 & 1998. The "Footnotes" section should be changed to "References", and several references should be updated to more recent ones. Axl ¤ [Talk] 15:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Axl, very much appreciated. This section was first on my list, I realise the rest of it needs improving and it's on my to-do list! I think I've made the changes you've brought up; if you think there's anything not quite done let me know :) --—Cyclonenim | Chat  15:24, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! The article is already improving. Let me know if/when you want me review the article again. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:39, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Axl I've rewritten the diagnosis section in one big go, which I suspect will be prone to a lot of errors. Also needs refs expanding significantly but I'll work on that tomorrow. Could you provide thoughts when you have time? No rush! Many thanks. --—Cyclonenim | Chat  16:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

I suggest that the second sentence in subsection "Clinical suspicion" should be moved up, out of the subsection altogether. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:22, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done --—Cyclonenim | Chat  10:47, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Diagnosis

From "Diagnosis", paragraph 2: "Poorly-controlled asthma is a common finding, with a case series only finding 19% of ABPA patients with well-controlled asthma." I don't think that a quote about a single case series particularly helpful. Also, this is complicated by the issue of possible inclusion of non-asthmatic patients, and use of oral/inhaled glucocorticoids. Axl ¤ [Talk] 15:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

I would not describe skin testing as part of "blood testing and serology". Axl ¤ [Talk] 15:25, 7 February 2014 (UTC)