Pao C S, Healy M J R, McKenzie S A
Department of Respiratory Paediatrics, Royal London Hospital, Barts and London NHS Trust, London, UK.
Pediatr Pulmonol. 2004 Jan;37(1):31-6. doi: 10.1002/ppul.10364.
Airway resistance using the interrupter technique (Rint) can be measured using commercial devices which employ different algorithms for estimating pressure change. We aim to describe differences in Rint due to algorithm. We compared Rint and change in Rint after bronchodilator, using four algorithms to estimate pressure change following interruption: 1) two-point back-extrapolation to interruption from points 70 msec and 30 msec from interruption, and similarly 2) to 15 msec from interruption, 3) at two-thirds from interruption, and 4) near end-interruption. Flow was measured immediately before interruption. Our subjects were 39 asymptomatic children 2-5 years old with previous intermittent wheeze. Rint differed significantly with algorithm. Geometric mean Rint (95% confidence interval (CI)) for algorithms 1-4 were 1.21 kPa x l(-1) x sec (1.18-1.24 kPa x l(-1) x sec), 1.31 kPa x l(-1) x sec (1.28-1.34 kPa x l(-1) x sec), 1.57 kPa x l(-1) x sec (1.54-1.61 kPa x l(-1) x sec) and 1.71 kPa x l(-1) x sec (1.67-1.75 kPa x l(-1) x sec), respectively. Measurement of change in R(int) following bronchodilator (BDR) did not differ on average with algorithm. Geometric means (95% CI) for BDR measurements for algorithms 1-4 were 29.9% (26.0-34.0%), 30.4% (26.4-34.5%), 32.9% (28.8-37.1%), and 31.7% (27.6-35.8%), respectively. However, measurement of change in individuals could differ by up to 40%, depending on algorithm. In conclusion, there are significant differences in Rint, depending on algorithm used to estimate pressure change. Measurement of change in Rint is unaffected on average, although in individuals there could be significant differences. Each laboratory should state its method and use the same algorithm for longitudinal and group data.
使用间断技术(Rint)测量气道阻力时,可以使用采用不同算法估计压力变化的商用设备。我们旨在描述因算法不同而导致的Rint差异。我们使用四种算法来估计中断后的压力变化,比较了Rint以及支气管扩张剂使用后Rint的变化:1)从距中断70毫秒和30毫秒的点两点向后外推至中断点,类似地,2)至距中断15毫秒的点,3)在中断点的三分之二处,以及4)接近中断末尾处。在中断前立即测量流量。我们的研究对象是39名2至5岁、既往有间歇性喘息的无症状儿童。Rint因算法不同而有显著差异。算法1至4的几何平均Rint(95%置信区间(CI))分别为1.21 kPa×l⁻¹×秒(1.18 - 1.24 kPa×l⁻¹×秒)、1.31 kPa×l⁻¹×秒(1.28 - 1.34 kPa×l⁻¹×秒)、1.57 kPa×l⁻¹×秒(1.54 - 1.61 kPa×l⁻¹×秒)和1.71 kPa×l⁻¹×秒(1.67 - 1.75 kPa×l⁻¹×秒)。支气管扩张剂使用后Rint变化(BDR)的测量在不同算法之间平均无差异。算法1至4的BDR测量的几何均值(95% CI)分别为29.9%(26.0 - 34.0%)、30.4%(26.4 - 34.5%)、32.9%(28.8 - 37.1%)和31.7%(27.6 - 35.8%)。然而,个体变化的测量可能因算法不同而相差高达40%。总之,根据用于估计压力变化的算法不同,Rint存在显著差异。Rint变化的测量平均不受影响,尽管个体之间可能存在显著差异。每个实验室都应说明其方法,并在纵向和组数据中使用相同的算法。