Asbestosis and tuberculosis

Our plain-English summary of Asbestosis and tuberculosis, by F. Segarra-Obiol, P. Lopez-Ibañez, J. Perez Nicolas (American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 1983).

The study

• Authors: F. Segarra-Obiol, P. Lopez-Ibañez, J. Perez Nicolas
• Journal: American Journal of Industrial Medicine
• Published: 1983;4(6):755-7
• Cited by: 7 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 001707).

Abstract

The frequent association between silicosis and tuberculosis has been known for a long time. However, the possible interrelationship between asbestosis and tuberculosis is not entirely clear, and some reports on the subject are contradictory. The incidence of tuberculosis was determined in three groups of people: 1) those with asbestosis, 2) those exposed to asbestos dust but without asbestosis, and 3) healthy people without pneumoconiotic exposure. Chest X-rays of 2,846 workers surveyed in this department between 1976 and 1980 were reviewed. Since only one case of active tuberculosis was detected, residual tuberculosis was the type encountered and this was diagnosed solely on its radiological signs. The incidence of tuberculosis was: 3.87% (N = 257) for group 1; 3.45% (N = 1,215) in group 2; and 3.93% (N = 1,374) for group 3. Statistical analysis confirms the lack of significant differences in the incidence of tuberculosis in the three groups. From these findings, it is concluded that asbestosis is not an influential factor in the appearance and development of tuberculosis.

In plain English

This Spanish study compared signs of tuberculosis in asbestos-exposed and unexposed workers. The authors reviewed chest X-rays of 2,846 workers examined at their Barcelona department in 1976-1980. The exposed workers came from Barcelona-area fibrocement, auto brake and textile industries. There were three groups: 257 workers with asbestosis, 1,215 exposed to asbestos dust without asbestosis, and 1,374 supposedly healthy people with no exposure to dusts known to cause pneumoconiosis. Only one case of active tuberculosis was found, among the supposedly healthy workers. The study therefore counted residual tuberculosis: X-ray scarring without symptoms, with negative sputum tests and a positive tuberculin skin test. Residual tuberculosis was found in 10 of 257 workers with asbestosis (3.87%), 42 of 1,215 exposed workers without asbestosis (3.45%), and 54 of 1,374 unexposed people (3.93%). The authors reported no statistically significant differences between the groups. They concluded that asbestosis is not an influential factor in the appearance and development of tuberculosis. They noted that the study looked at one point in time rather than following workers, and that diagnosis rested mainly on X-ray signs.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: cross-sectional analysis of chest X-rays (the authors state it was not a longitudinal cohort follow-up)
• Who was studied: 2,846 workers surveyed by the authors' department in Barcelona, Spain, between 1976 and 1980, in three groups: 257 with asbestosis, 1,215 exposed to asbestos dust without asbestosis, and 1,374 supposedly healthy people with no pneumoconiotic exposure
• Exposure: asbestos dust exposure in fibrocement, auto brake and textile industries of the Barcelona area (fiber types not stated). Asbestosis was defined as a definite exposure history plus irregular opacities of profusion category 1/2 or greater on X-ray
• Main results:
  • Only one case of active tuberculosis was found (by X-rays and positive sputum tests), and it was among the supposedly healthy workers
  • Residual pulmonary tuberculosis was found in 10 of 257 workers with asbestosis (3.87% in the table and abstract, given as 3.8% in the results text), 42 of 1,215 exposed workers without asbestosis (3.45%), and 54 of 1,374 healthy unexposed people (3.93%)
  • Chi-square analysis showed no statistically significant differences in tuberculosis among the three groups
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that asbestosis is not an influential factor in the appearance and development of tuberculosis
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The study was not a longitudinal follow-up of a cohort
  • Only one case of active tuberculosis was detected, so the study dealt with residual tuberculosis
  • Residual tuberculosis was diagnosed from X-ray appearance, absence of symptoms and normal laboratory data. The authors judged the conclusions valid because the same criteria were applied to all three groups

Topics

The National Library of Medicine indexes this study under subjects our site covers: Asbestosis.

Medical terms in this study, explained in our Lexicon: Silicosis, Chest X-Ray.

Related studies

• Evaluation of ALS assay of TB-SA for diagnosis of pulmonary tuberculosis — J. Jiao, M.S. Wang, et al. (2015)
• Pleural mesothelioma in patient with pulmonary tuberculosis: report of a case — U.J. Martinis, V.R. Radovic (1965)
• Asbestos and tuberculosis in Trieste, Italy — A.M. Walker, G. Stanta, et al. (1985)
• Which is the Role of Pneumonectomy in the Era of Parenchymal-Sparing Procedures? Early/Long-Term Survival and Functional Results of a Single-Center Experience — A. Janet-Vendroux, M. Loi, et al. (2015)
• Rounded atelectasis of the lung — G.T. Stathopoulos, M.T. Karamessini, et al. (2005)
• Expression Profiles of Cytokine mRNAs in the Pleural Fluid Reveal Differences Among Tuberculosis, Malignancies, and Pneumonia-Exudative Pleural Effusions — D.L. Espósito, V.R. Bollela, et al. (2015)

Browse more research in American Journal of Industrial Medicine, or return to medical research.