Background: This document provides clinical recommendations for the diagnosis of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). It represents a collaborative effort between the American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society, Japanese Respiratory Society, and Latin American Thoracic Society. Methods: The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by a multidisciplinary committee of IPF experts. The evidence was appraised and recommendations were formulated, written, and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results: The guideline panel updated the diagnostic criteria for IPF. Previously defined patterns of usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) were refined to patterns of UIP, probable UIP, indeterminate for UIP, and alternate diagnosis. For patients with newly detected interstitial lung disease (ILD) who have a high-resolution computed tomography scan pattern of probable UIP, indeterminate for UIP, or an alternative diagnosis, conditional recommendations were made for performing BAL and surgical lung biopsy; because of lack of evidence, no recommendation was made for or against performing transbronchial lung biopsy or lung cryobiopsy. In contrast, for patients with newly detected ILD who have a high-resolution computed tomography scan pattern of UIP, strong recommendations were made against performing surgical lung biopsy, transbronchial lung biopsy, and lung cryobiopsy, and a conditional recommendation was made against performing BAL. Additional recommendations included a conditional recommendation for multidisciplinary discussion and a strong recommendation against measurement of serum biomarkers for the sole purpose of distinguishing IPF from other ILDs. Conclusions: The guideline panel provided recommendations related to the diagnosis of IPF.

Although these conditions are rare, a proportion of patients with interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) may develop a progressive-fibrosing phenotype. Progressive fibrosis is associated with worsening respiratory symptoms, lung function decline, limited response to immunomodulatory therapies, decreased quality of life and, potentially, early death. Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis may be regarded as a model for other progressive-fibrosing ILDs. Here we focus on other ILDs that may present a progressive-fibrosing phenotype, namely idiopathic nonspecific interstitial pneumonia, unclassifiable idiopathic interstitial pneumonia, connective tissue disease-associated ILDs (e.g.rheumatoid arthritis-related ILD), fibrotic chronic hypersensitivity pneumonitis, fibrotic chronic sarcoidosis and ILDs related to other occupational exposures. Differential diagnosis of these ILDs can be challenging, and requires detailed consideration of clinical, radiological and histopathological features. Accurate and early diagnosis is crucial to ensure that patients are treated optimally.

Background: The presence of emphysema is relatively common in patients with fibrotic interstitial lung disease. This has been designated combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE). The lack of consensus over definitions and diagnostic criteria has limited CPFE research. Goals: The objectives of this task force were to review the terminology, definition, characteristics, pathophysiology, and research priorities of CPFE and to explore whether CPFE is a syndrome. Methods: This research statement was developed by a committee including 19 pulmonologists, 5 radiologists, 3 pathologists, 2 methodologists, and 2 patient representatives. The final document was supported by a focused systematic review that identified and summarized all recent publications related to CPFE. Results: This task force identified that patients with CPFE are predominantly male, with a history of smoking, severe dyspnea, relatively preserved airflow rates and lung volumes on spirometry, severely impaired Dl_CO, exertional hypoxemia, frequent pulmonary hypertension, and a dismal prognosis. The committee proposes to identify CPFE as a syndrome, given the clustering of pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema, shared pathogenetic pathways, unique considerations related to disease progression, increased risk of complications (pulmonary hypertension, lung cancer, and/or mortality), and implications for clinical trial design. There are varying features of interstitial lung disease and emphysema in CPFE. The committee offers a research definition and classification criteria and proposes that studies on CPFE include a comprehensive description of radiologic and, when available, pathological patterns, including some recently described patterns such as smoking-related interstitial fibrosis. Conclusions: This statement delineates the syndrome of CPFE and highlights research priorities.

Standardization of trans-bronchial lung cryobiopsy in diffuse parenchymal lung diseases is imminent; however, the majority of published series on cryobiopsy include a limited number of patients and are characterized by several differences in procedural technical details. This is an observational, retrospective cohort study. Aim of the study was to suggest some sampling strategies related to transbronchial cryobiopsy in the diagnostic work-up of patients with diffuse parenchymal lung diseases. Six hundred ninety-nine patients with suspected diffuse parenchymal lung disease were recruited. A specific pathological diagnosis was achieved in 614/699 cases (87.8%) and a multidisciplinary diagnosis was obtained in 630/699 cases (90.1%). Diagnostic yield was significantly influenced by the number of samples taken (1 vs ≥ 2 biopsies, p < 0.005). In 60.4% of patients, biopsies were taken from one site and in 39.6% from different sites (in the same lobe or in two different lobes), with a significant increase in diagnostic yield, specifically in patients with fibrotic lung diseases (65.5% vs 93.4%, p < 0.0001). The 2.4 mm or 1.9 mm probes were used, with no differences in terms of diagnostic yield. Regarding safety, pneumothorax occurred in 19.2% and was influenced by baseline lung function; in all patients Fogarty balloon has been used and severe haemorrhage occurred in 0.7% of cases. Three patients (0.4% of cases) died within 30 days after the procedure. We propose some sampling strategies of cryobiopsy which seem to be associated with a higher diagnostic yield and a favorable risk/benefit ratio: sampling at least two samples in different sites, using either the 2.4 mm or the 1.9 mm probe, intubating the patients and using bronchial blockers/catheters.

In idiopathic interstitial pneumonia (IIP), the significance of connective tissue disease (CTD) features in the absence of a specific CTD diagnosis remains unclear. We studied the clinical and prognostic utility of a diagnosis of undifferentiated CTD (UCTD) in patients with biopsy-proven IIP.IIP patients undergoing surgical lung biopsy (1979–2005) were studied (nonspecific interstitial pneumonia (NSIP), n=45; idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, n=56). UCTD was considered present when serum autoantibodies were present and symptoms or signs suggested CTD. The relationship between UCTD and NSIP histology was evaluated. A clinical algorithm that best predicted NSIP histology was constructed usinga priorivariables. The prognostic utility of UCTD, and of this algorithm, was evaluated.UCTD was present in 14 (31%) NSIP and seven (13%) IPF patients. UCTD was not associated with a survival benefit. The algorithm predictive of NSIP (OR 10.4, 95% CI 3.21–33.67; p<0.0001) consisted of the absence of typical high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) features for IPF and 1) a compatible demographic profile (females aged <50 yrs) or 2) Raynaud’s phenomenon. In patients with an HRCT scan not typical for IPF, this algorithm predicted improved survival (hazard ratio 0.35, 95% CI 0.14–0.85; p=0.02) independent of IIP severity.UCTD is associated with NSIP histology. However, the diagnostic and prognostic significance of UCTD in IIP patients remains unclear.