Unit of Clinical Physiology, Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, HUS Medical Imaging Center, Helsinki University Central Hospital, P,O,Box 340, Helsinki, HUS 00029, Finland.
BMC Pulm Med. 2014 Mar 5;14:34. doi: 10.1186/1471-2466-14-34.
Dynamic gas compression during forced expiration has an influence on conventional flow-volume spirometry results. The extent of gas compression in different pulmonary disorders remains obscure. Utilizing a flow plethysmograph we determined the difference between thoracic and mouth flows during forced expiration as an indication of thoracic gas compression in subjects with different pulmonary diseases characterized by limitations in pulmonary mechanics.
Patients with emphysema (N = 16), interstitial lung disease (ILD) (N = 15), obesity (N = 15) and healthy controls (N = 16) were included. Compressed expiratory flow-volume curves (at mouth) and corresponding compression-free curves (thoracic) were recorded. Peak flow (PEF) and maximal flows at 75%, 50% and 25% of remaining forced vital capacity (MEF75, MEF50 and MEF25) were derived from both recordings. Their respective difference was assessed as an indicator of gas compression.
In all groups, significant differences between thoracic and mouth flows were found at MEF50 (p < 0.01). In controls, a significant difference was also measured at MEF75 (p <0.005), in emphysema subjects, at PEF and MEF75 (p < 0.05, p < 0.005) and in obese subjects at MEF75 (p <0.005) and MEF25 (p < 0.01). ILD patients showed the lowest difference between thoracic and mouth flows at MEF75 relative to controls and emphysema patients (p < 0.005, p < 0.001). Obese subjects did not differ from controls, however, the difference between thoracic and mouth flows was significantly higher than in patients with emphysema at MEF50 (p < 0.001) and MEF25 (p < 0.005).
Alveolar gas compression distorts the forced expiratory flow volume curve in all studied groups at the middle fraction of forced expiratory flow. Consequently, mouth flows are underestimated and the reduction of flow measured at 75% and 50% of vital capacity is often considerable. However, gas compression profiles in stiff lungs, in patients with decreased elastic recoil in emphysema and in obesity differ; the difference between thoracic and mouth flows in forced expiration was minimal in ILD at the first part of forced expiration and was higher in obesity than in emphysema at the middle and last parts of forced expiration.
用力呼气时的动态气体压缩对常规流量-容积肺量计结果有影响。不同肺部疾病中的气体压缩程度仍不清楚。我们利用流量体描仪测定了不同肺部疾病患者用力呼气时胸内流量和口腔流量之间的差异,以此作为胸内气体压缩的指标,这些患者的肺部力学受限。
纳入了肺气肿患者(N=16)、间质性肺疾病患者(ILD)(N=15)、肥胖患者(N=15)和健康对照者(N=16)。记录用力呼气时的压缩流量-容积曲线(口腔)和相应的无压缩曲线(胸内)。从两种记录中得出峰值流量(PEF)和最大流量在 75%、50%和 25%用力肺活量时(MEF75、MEF50 和 MEF25)。评估它们各自的差异作为气体压缩的指标。
在所有组中,在 MEF50 时都发现了胸内和口腔流量之间的显著差异(p<0.01)。在对照组中,在 MEF75 时也测量到了显著差异(p<0.005),在肺气肿患者中,在 PEF 和 MEF75 时也测量到了显著差异(p<0.05,p<0.005),在肥胖患者中,在 MEF75 和 MEF25 时也测量到了显著差异(p<0.005,p<0.01)。ILD 患者在 MEF75 时的胸内和口腔流量之间的差异与对照组和肺气肿患者相比最低(p<0.005,p<0.001)。肥胖患者与对照组无差异,但在 MEF50 和 MEF25 时,胸内和口腔流量之间的差异明显高于肺气肿患者(p<0.001)。
在所有研究组中,肺泡气体压缩在用力呼气的中间部分扭曲了用力呼气流量容积曲线。因此,低估了口腔流量,并且在测量 75%和 50%肺活量时的流量减少量往往相当大。然而,在硬肺、肺气肿中弹性回缩减少的患者和肥胖中的气体压缩曲线不同;在用力呼气的前一部分,ILD 中胸内和口腔流量之间的差异最小,而在用力呼气的中间和最后部分,肥胖中的差异高于肺气肿。