Background: This document presents the American Thoracic Society clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD). Target Audience: Clinicians investigating adult and pediatric patients for possible PCD. Methods: Systematic reviews and, when appropriate, meta-analyses were conducted to summarize all available evidence pertinent to our clinical questions. Evidence was assessed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach for diagnosis and discussed by a multidisciplinary panel with expertise in PCD. Predetermined conflict-of-interest management strategies were applied, and recommendations were formulated, written, and graded exclusively by the nonconflicted panelists. Three conflicted individuals were also prohibited from writing, editing, or providing feedback on the relevant sections of the manuscript. Results: After considering diagnostic test accuracy, confidence in the estimates for each diagnostic test, relative importance of test results studied, desirable and undesirable direct consequences of each diagnostic test, downstream consequences of each diagnostic test result, patient values and preferences, costs, feasibility, acceptability, and implications for health equity, the panel made recommendations for or against the use of specific diagnostic tests as compared with using the current reference standard (transmission electron microscopy and/or genetic testing) for the diagnosis of PCD. Conclusions: The panel formulated and provided a rationale for the direction as well as for the strength of each recommendation to establish the diagnosis of PCD.

Yuksel H, et al. Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2012 Mar;4(2):98-103. http://dx.doi.org/10.4168/aair.2012.4.2.98

Rationale: Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is a rare disorder causing chronic otosinopulmonary disease, generally diagnosed through evaluation of respiratory ciliary ultrastructure and/or genetic testing. Nasal nitric oxide (nNO) measurement is used as a PCD screening test because patients with PCD have low nNO levels, but its value as a diagnostic test remains unknown. Objectives: To perform a systematic review to assess the utility of nNO measurement (index test) as a diagnostic tool compared with the reference standard of electron microscopy (EM) evaluation of ciliary defects and/or detection of biallelic mutations in PCD genes. Data Sources: Ten databases were searched for reference sources from database inception through July 29, 2016. Data Extraction: Study inclusion was limited to publications with rigorous nNO index testing, reference standard diagnostic testing with EM and/or genetics, and calculable diagnostic accuracy information for cooperative patients (generally >5 yr old) with high suspicion of PCD. Synthesis: Meta-analysis provided a summary estimate for sensitivity and specificity and a hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool was used to assess study quality, and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was used to assess the certainty of evidence. In 12 study populations (1,344 patients comprising 514 with PCD and 830 without PCD), using a reference standard of EM alone or EM and/or genetic testing, summary sensitivity was 97.6% (92.7–99.2) and specificity was 96.0% (87.9–98.7), with a positive likelihood ratio of 24.3 (7.6–76.9), a negative likelihood ratio of 0.03 (0.01–0.08), and a diagnostic odds ratio of 956.8 (141.2–6481.5) for nNO measurements. After studies using EM alone as the reference standard were excluded, the seven studies using an extended reference standard of EM and/or genetic testing showed a summary sensitivity of nNO measurements of 96.3% (88.7–98.9) and specificity of 96.4% (85.1–99.2), with a positive likelihood ratio of 26.5 (5.9–119.1), a negative likelihood ratio of 0.04 (0.01–0.12), and a diagnostic odds ratio of 699.3 (67.4–7256.0). Certainty of the evidence was graded as moderate. Conclusions: nNO is a sensitive and specific test for PCD in cooperative patients (generally >5 yr old) with high clinical suspicion for this disease. With a moderate level of evidence, this meta-analysis confirms that nNO testing using velum closure maneuvers has diagnostic accuracy similar to EM and/or genetic testing for PCD when cystic fibrosis is ruled out. Thus, low nNO values accompanied by an appropriate clinical phenotype could be used as a diagnostic PCD test, though EM and/or genetics will continue to provide confirmatory information.

Background: Infantile wheezing is a common problem, but there are no guidelines for the evaluation of infants with recurrent or persistent wheezing that is not relieved or prevented by standard therapies. Methods: An American Thoracic Society–sanctioned guideline development committee selected clinical questions related to uncertainties or controversies in the diagnostic evaluation of wheezing infants. Members of the committee conducted pragmatic evidence syntheses, which followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The evidence syntheses were used to inform the formulation and grading of recommendations. Results: The pragmatic evidence syntheses identified few studies that addressed the clinical questions. The studies that were identified constituted very low-quality evidence, consisting almost exclusively of case series with risk of selection bias, indirect patient populations, and imprecise estimates. The committee made conditional recommendations to perform bronchoscopic airway survey, bronchoalveolar lavage, esophageal pH monitoring, and a swallowing study. It also made conditional recommendations against empiric food avoidance, upper gastrointestinal radiography, and gastrointestinal scintigraphy. Finally, the committee recommended additional research about the roles of infant pulmonary function testing and food avoidance or dietary changes, based on allergy testing. Conclusions: Although infantile wheezing is common, there is a paucity of evidence to guide clinicians in selecting diagnostic tests for recurrent or persistent wheezing. Our committee made several conditional recommendations to guide clinicians; however, additional research that measures clinical outcomes is needed to improve our confidence in the effects of various diagnostic interventions and to allow advice to be provided with greater confidence.