Posted , 7 users are following.
I hear so many more people say they went to there doctor and was told they have BX What could be causing it or is just years ago they didn't have a name for it and we were told it was a pneumonia or a bad chest infection
1 like, 8 replies
We want the community to be a useful resource for our users but it is important to remember that the community are not moderated or reviewed by doctors and so you should not rely on opinions or advice given by other users in respect of any healthcare matters. Always speak to your doctor before acting and in cases of emergency seek appropriate medical assistance immediately. Use of the community is subject to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and steps will be taken to remove posts identified as being in breach of those terms.
Operalyn Papillion
Posted
Bronchiectasis is damage to the lungs. It can be caused by many things - childhoods illnesses such as whooping cough, measles etc. and it is part of the serious condition cystic fibrosis. It usually means that you get a lot of mucous on your lungs, a rattly cough and are very prone to picking up chest infections. That's a really simplified version. I have had mine since childhood. It was much more common then because there was no vaccination against measles and whooping cough then. It has to be managed by taking antibiotics for infections and various ways to clear the mucous from your lungs. It's a condition that can be managed but it is always helpful to see a lung specialist if possible.
Papillion Operalyn
Posted
kath58048 Operalyn
Posted
I am somewhat confused here ! Having BX for 14 years my consultant said it was the airways that were infected with BX .I agree about the sputum mass cough etc .He said my lungs were good .Another point I have to exercise walk push myself a bit Don't sit around to long were his words .Anyone else agree ?.X all take care .
aitarg35939 kath58048
Posted
BX is having enlarged areas of the lungs. Those enlarged areas no longer move things, mucus and irritants, germs, etc., up and out. These areas are sometimes referred to as being dead pockets.
They make perfect breeding grounds for growth of nasties: warm, dark and moist. When things grow there, we have infections.
Some of us get this way because of 1 massive lung infection. I had one in '85, was in and out of the hospital many times and never completely knocked it out until about 3 months later. I was 31, and before that I never had any lung problems.
18 months ago I had a small kitchen fire. Lots of smoke. Went to hospital for a burn & got a lung treatment. Too bad I had blown off all pulmos by then because perhaps I wouldn't have ended up where I'm at w/BX.
Oh well.
steve62514 Papillion
Posted
I suspect that bronchiectasis has received more attention by the medical profession over recent years, possibly a function of some of the following:
* the advent of internet, allowing people to take a more active approach to their own health and providing resources like Patient that inform
* natural progression of professionalism within the healthcare profession. In the UK most doctors had probably not even heard the term bronchiectasis several years ago
* people are generally more sceptical of professionals' opinions, not just doctors. Doctors still well respected but people are more likely to ask questions/prod
* attention given to lung disease as a result of the advent of cigarette smoking and focus on it's adverse health implications. I would not be surprised if the number of pulmonology specialists is 10 times what it was 50 years ago
* technology progress - X-Rays and advanced scanning costs have become affordable on a routine basis by health providers [you can get an X-Ray in my now home country Thailand for 150 baht (GBP 4/ US$ 5)]
Operalyn Papillion
Posted
I have had bronchiectasis since about 1950. It was well known then and I was on a hospital ward with many other children with the same complaint several times. They used to do a lot of surgery in those days, cutting away the area of the lungs where the airways were affected. In my case it's all over the place so I wasn't a suitable case.
I have attended outpatients clinics with it all my life but apart from there I never met anyone with it. Now I know at least three people locally who have been diagnosed with it. I think it disappeared off the radar for a long time and some patients were misdiagnosed. It's definitely being diagnosed again these days.
gary87083 Papillion
Posted
steve62514 gary87083
Posted
"Not sure if a simply x-ray is sufficient to diagnose BX."
For avoidance of doubt Gary, everything I've read on the internet by apparently authoritative sources (health providers and pulonology specialists, rather than bloggers/patients like us) says that a CT scan is a necessary part of diagnosis for bronchiectasis and by implication an X-Ray scan would not be conclusive (or even indicative). My Thai local pulmonolgist and another one in Thailand's second city Chiang Mai ran X-Rays to determine what was going on with my lungs in response to infections 3 to 4 years ago. Both could detect the extent of pneumonia in my lungs but neither detected the possibility of bronchiectasis. To be fair I may not have emphasised sputum production as a current problem at the time, so they would not have been specifically looking for it. By a very roundabout way Papworth Hospital's lung defence team alighted on bronchX after all sorts of scans including CT and PET had been run and an emerging lung lymphoma had been successfully radio-therapied away, but infections were still recurring and sputum was more to the fore.