← Return to Two bits of good news!! (and nebulizing with saline)

Discussion
Comment receiving replies
@lorifilipek

Hi all, I noticed that the study did not look for MAC or NTM in their patients, only other types of bacteria ("At baseline 60% of the participants in the IS group and 55% in the HTS group had a positive sputum culture for Pseudomonas, Haemophilus, Aspergillus, Staphylococcus aureus or Streptococcus with no significant difference in isolates between groups.") We don't know whether any of the participants had MAC. For those of us with MAC, as well as bronchiectasis, the study @windwalker (Terri) and @alleycatkate (Kate) posted (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4850692/) suggests that 7% would be necessary to keep MAC under control.

Jump to this post


Replies to "Hi all, I noticed that the study did not look for MAC or NTM in their..."

Thanks for your reply. The study is only meaningful for those of us who cannot tolerate 7% or, in my case, 3% as well. It tells m, and anyone else with inflamed, delicate airways that using .9% is not a waste of time.