Goldstein M F, Veza B A, Dunsky E H, Dvorin D J, Belecanech G A, Haralabatos I C
Department of Medicine and Pediatrics, Allergy and Immunology Division, MCP Hahnemann University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Chest. 2001 Apr;119(4):1001-10. doi: 10.1378/chest.119.4.1001.
The validity of peak expiratory flow variation (PEFvar) as defined by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) guidelines as a diagnostic tool for suspected asthma or its comparative value to methacholine inhalation challenge (MIC) or postbronchodilator (BD) FEV(1) responses has not been formally assessed. We prospectively analyzed the correlation of 28 different PEFvar indexes (including 4 NHLBI-compatible indexes) with MIC and pre-BD and post-BD FEV(1) responses in suspected asthmatic subjects with normal findings on lung examination, chest radiography, and baseline spirometry.
Participants were asked to record peak expiratory flow four times daily for 2 to 3 weeks, followed by an MIC. During a minimum 6-month follow-up period, a clinical diagnosis of asthma was made or ruled out based on testing results and response to antiasthma therapy.
Medical school-affiliated subspecialty private practice of allergy, asthma, and immunology.
One hundred twenty-one suspected asthmatic patients with normal findings on lung examination, chest radiography, and baseline spirometry.
Fifty-seven subjects completed both the peak flow diary and the MIC and were accepted for statistical analysis. There were no statistically significant correlations between any peak expiratory flow index and MIC. Among the three diagnostic tools evaluated, MIC had the highest sensitivity (85.71%). All the PEFvar indexes and post-BD responses had low sensitivity and high false-negative rates.
PEFvar and post-BD FEV(1) responses are poor substitutes for MIC in the assessment of patients with suspected asthma with normal findings on lung examination, chest radiography, and spirometry. Our findings warrant a reconsideration of the NHLBI guidelines recommendation of the utility of PEFvar as a diagnostic tool for asthma in clinical practice.
美国国立心肺血液研究所(NHLBI)指南所定义的呼气峰值流量变异率(PEFvar)作为疑似哮喘诊断工具的有效性,或其与乙酰甲胆碱吸入激发试验(MIC)或支气管扩张剂后(BD)第一秒用力呼气容积(FEV₁)反应的比较价值,尚未得到正式评估。我们前瞻性地分析了28种不同的PEFvar指标(包括4种与NHLBI标准相符的指标)与MIC以及肺部检查、胸部X光和基线肺功能测定结果正常的疑似哮喘患者支气管扩张剂使用前和使用后的FEV₁反应之间的相关性。
要求参与者连续2至3周每天记录4次呼气峰值流量,随后进行MIC。在至少6个月的随访期内,根据检测结果和抗哮喘治疗反应做出哮喘的临床诊断或排除诊断。
医学院附属的过敏、哮喘和免疫学专科私人诊所。
121名肺部检查、胸部X光和基线肺功能测定结果正常的疑似哮喘患者。
57名受试者完成了峰值流量日记和MIC,并被纳入统计分析。任何呼气峰值流量指标与MIC之间均无统计学显著相关性。在评估的三种诊断工具中,MIC的敏感性最高(85.71%)。所有PEFvar指标和支气管扩张剂使用后的反应敏感性低且假阴性率高。
在评估肺部检查、胸部X光和肺功能测定结果正常的疑似哮喘患者时,PEFvar和支气管扩张剂使用后的FEV₁反应不能很好地替代MIC。我们的研究结果值得重新考虑NHLBI指南中关于PEFvar作为临床实践中哮喘诊断工具实用性的建议。