1 Executive summary

This report describes a national survey of Brazilian services caring for people with primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD). Results are self-reported and summarize service-level patient volume and access to diagnostic methods. They should not be interpreted as population prevalence estimates.

The current file contains 25 submissions. Two submissions from Hospital Universitário - UFJF were combined according to the consolidation rule described in the Methods section, resulting in 24 reporting units across 13 states.

24
Reporting units
13
Brazilian states
227
Confirmed PCD
408
Clinical suspicion
635
Total reported
18
Median per unit
9-36
IQR per unit
51.0%
Share in five largest units

The five reporting units with the largest patient volumes account for 51.0% of all confirmed plus clinically suspected patients reported. This concentration describes the responding network, not the national distribution of all patients with PCD.

2 Methods

2.1 Design and analysis unit

This is a cross-sectional descriptive analysis of a center survey. The unit of analysis is the reporting service or a prespecified consolidated center. Patient counts represent people reported to be in active follow-up at the time of each response.

The survey definitions were retained:

  • Confirmed PCD: biallelic pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in a PCD-associated gene and/or a classic ultrastructural defect on electron microscopy.
  • Clinical suspicion: a suggestive clinical history without confirmation by genetics or electron microscopy.

No inferential tests were performed. Counts, percentages, medians, and interquartile ranges are presented. Percentages for diagnostic availability use all reporting units as the denominator and preserve missing responses as Not reported.

2.2 Data processing rules

Column selection uses normalized survey-question text rather than column positions. This prevents auxiliary form fields from being mistaken for analytical variables when the form schema changes.

Two submissions from Hospital Universitário - UFJF were consolidated into one reporting unit. Patient counts were summed, respondent names were retained, and the highest reported access level for each diagnostic method was used in this order: on-site, partnered service, being implemented, not available, and not reported. Because patient overlap cannot be assessed from the spreadsheet, the combined UFJF count should be confirmed before publication.

The response recorded as Hospital Universitário Professor Edgard Santos with location “Bahia” was assigned to Salvador, BA. This is an explicit location correction used only for geographic summaries.

The report intentionally ignores auxiliary columns that are not among the 16 analytical survey fields. Their presence is documented in the data-quality section but their contents are not analyzed.

3 Patient volume

Confirmed and clinically suspected PCD patients reported by each center or reporting service.

Confirmed and clinically suspected PCD patients reported by each center or reporting service.

Patient volume by reporting unit
Center Location Confirmed Suspected Total
UNICAMP Pediatrics Campinas/SP 25 60 85
InCor-USP São Paulo/SP 50 30 80
Hospital de Messejana - Dr Carlis Alberto Studart Gomes Fortaleza/CE 0 62 62
Instituto da Criança e do Adolescente HCFMUSP Pediatrics São Paulo/SP 25 25 50
Hospital São Lucas-PUCRS Porto Alegre/RS 7 40 47
Hospital do Pulmão Blumenau/SC 0 40 40
Instituto Nacional da Saúde da Mulher, Criança e Adolescente Fernandes Figueira - IFF-FIOCRUZ Pediatrics Rio de Janeiro/RJ 17 18 35
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Rio de Janeiro/RJ 8 17 25
Hospital Universitário Professor Edgard Santos Salvador/BA 10 14 24
Hospital de Clínicas-UFRGS Porto Alegre/RS 4 20 24
Hospital Infantil Albert Sabin Pediatrics Fortaleza/CE 2 18 20
Hospital Infantil João Paulo II Pediatrics Belo Horizonte/MG 8 10 18
Hospital Universitario Onofre Lopes-UFRN Natal/RN 10 7 17
Hospital de Clínicas-UFG Goiânia/GO 9 7 16
Hospital Estadual Infantil Nossa Senhora da Glória Pediatrics Vitória/ES 5 11 16
Hospital de Clínicas-UFPR Pediatrics Curitiba/PR 7 7 14
IMIP - Instituto de Medicina Integral Professor Fernando Figueira Recife/PE 10 0 10
Hospital da Criança de Brasilia José Alencar Pediatrics Brasília/DF 9 0 9
Hospital de Clínicas-UFRGS Pediatrics Porto Alegre/RS 3 6 9
UNICAMP Campinas/SP 8 0 8
Hospital Universitário - UFJF Juiz de Fora/MG 5 3 8
Hospital Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Vitória Vitória/ES 1 7 8
Hospital das Clinicas-UFMG Pediatrics Belo Horizonte/MG 2 5 7
Hospital da Criança Santo Antonio Pediatrics Porto Alegre/RS 2 1 3

4 Geographic distribution

Reported patient volume by state. Totals reflect participating centers only.

Reported patient volume by state. Totals reflect participating centers only.

Participating reporting units and patient volume by state
State Reporting units Confirmed Suspected Total
SP 4 108 115 223
RS 4 16 67 83
CE 2 2 80 82
RJ 2 25 35 60
SC 1 0 40 40
MG 3 15 18 33
BA 1 10 14 24
ES 2 6 18 24
RN 1 10 7 17
GO 1 9 7 16
PR 1 7 7 14
PE 1 10 0 10
DF 1 9 0 9

5 Diagnostic capacity

5.1 Availability by method

Reported availability of diagnostic methods across participating reporting units.

Reported availability of diagnostic methods across participating reporting units.

Method On-site Partnered Implementing Not available
Electron microscopy 2 (8.3%) 5 (20.8%) 1 (4.2%) 16 (66.7%)
Genetics 5 (20.8%) 11 (45.8%) 2 (8.3%) 6 (25.0%)
Immunofluorescence 1 (4.2%) 7 (29.2%) 0 (0.0%) 16 (66.7%)
Nasal NO 3 (12.5%) 4 (16.7%) 2 (8.3%) 15 (62.5%)
Sweat test 15 (62.5%) 7 (29.2%) 1 (4.2%) 1 (4.2%)
Videomicroscopy 1 (4.2%) 3 (12.5%) 0 (0.0%) 20 (83.3%)

Table cells show the number and percentage of reporting units, n (%).

5.2 Availability by center

Availability of each diagnostic method by reporting unit.

Availability of each diagnostic method by reporting unit.

6 Planned implementation

The table summarizes methods that respondents reported planning to implement within the next two years. Percentages use all reporting units as the denominator; a center may select more than one method.

Diagnostic methods planned for implementation
Method Centers Percent
Genetics 11 45.8%
Nasal NO 10 41.7%
Immunofluorescence 4 16.7%
Electron microscopy 3 12.5%
Videomicroscopy 1 4.2%

7 Nasal brushing for immunofluorescence

Interest in collecting and referring nasal brushing samples
Response Centers Percent
Yes 24 100.0%

8 Data quality and interpretation

Automated data-quality checks
Check Result
Raw survey submissions 25
Reporting units after the prespecified consolidation 24
Rows missing a confirmed count 0
Rows missing a suspected count 0
Reporting units missing city or state 0
Auxiliary columns excluded from analysis 6

The current workbook contains 22 columns. The analysis uses the 16 survey fields listed in the Methods section and excludes 6 auxiliary columns. Exclusion is based on field meaning, not column number.

The following limitations should accompany any external use of these results:

9 Participating centers

Participating reporting units
Center Responsible professional(s) Location Age group served
Hospital Universitário Professor Edgard Santos Edna Lúcia Santos de Souza Salvador/BA Children and adolescents
Hospital Infantil Albert Sabin Pediatrics Ângela Elizabeth Holanda Araújo Freitas Fortaleza/CE Children and adolescents
Hospital de Messejana - Dr Carlis Alberto Studart Gomes Mara Rúbia Fernandes de Figueiredo Fortaleza/CE Adults
Hospital da Criança de Brasilia José Alencar Pediatrics Luciana Monte Brasília/DF Children and adolescents
Hospital Estadual Infantil Nossa Senhora da Glória Pediatrics Nyella Miossi Pinto Vitória/ES Children and adolescents
Hospital Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Vitória Faradiba Sarquis Serpa Vitória/ES Adults
Hospital de Clínicas-UFG Lusmaia Damaceno Camargo Costa Goiânia/GO All ages
Hospital Infantil João Paulo II Pediatrics Chalene Guimarães soares Mezêncio Belo Horizonte/MG Children and adolescents
Hospital das Clinicas-UFMG Pediatrics Claudia Ribeiro de Andrade Belo Horizonte/MG Children and adolescents
Hospital Universitário - UFJF Marta Cristina Duarte; Célio de Barros Barbosa Juiz de Fora/MG All ages
IMIP - Instituto de Medicina Integral Professor Fernando Figueira Patrícia Gomes de Matos Bezerra Recife/PE All ages
Hospital de Clínicas-UFPR Pediatrics Kharine Yukari Fujii e Débora Chong Curitiba/PR Children and adolescents
Instituto Nacional da Saúde da Mulher, Criança e Adolescente Fernandes Figueira - IFF-FIOCRUZ Pediatrics Patrícia Fernandes Barreto Machado Costa Rio de Janeiro/RJ Children and adolescents
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Raphael Freitas Jaber de Oliveira Rio de Janeiro/RJ Adults
Hospital Universitario Onofre Lopes-UFRN Vera Maria Dantas Natal/RN All ages
Hospital São Lucas-PUCRS Marcus H. Jones e Jordana H. Hammes Porto Alegre/RS All ages
Hospital da Criança Santo Antonio Pediatrics Gilberto Bueno Fischer Porto Alegre/RS Children and adolescents
Hospital de Clínicas-UFRGS Paulo de Tarso Roth Dalcin Porto Alegre/RS Adults
Hospital de Clínicas-UFRGS Pediatrics Valentina C. B. Gava Chakr Porto Alegre/RS Children and adolescents
Hospital do Pulmão Marina Andrade Lima Blumenau/SC All ages
UNICAMP Eulalia Sakano Campinas/SP Adults
UNICAMP Pediatrics José Dirceu Ribeiro Campinas/SP Children and adolescents
InCor-USP Rodrigo Athanazio e Samia Rached São Paulo/SP Adults
Instituto da Criança e do Adolescente HCFMUSP Pediatrics Luiz Vicente Ribeiro F da Silva-Filho São Paulo/SP Children and adolescents

10 Reproducibility information

The report was generated from pcd_centers.xlsx, last modified on 2026-09-09 16:16 -03. The most recent survey submission in the file is dated 2026-09-09.

Core software versions
Software Version
R 4.6.1
rmarkdown 2.32
knitr 1.51
tidyverse 2.0.0
readxl 1.5.0