Suppr超能文献

在伴有和不伴有固定气流受限的慢性阻塞性肺疾病和哮喘中,通过脉冲振荡法和肺量计对小气道功能障碍进行比较评估。

Comparative assessment of small airway dysfunction by impulse oscillometry and spirometry in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma with and without fixed airflow obstruction.

作者信息

Liwsrisakun Chalerm, Chaiwong Warawut, Pothirat Chaicharn

机构信息

Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Allergy, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.

出版信息

Front Med (Lausanne). 2023 May 17;10:1181188. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2023.1181188. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Small airways play a major role in the pathogenesis and prognosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. More data on small airway dysfunction (SAD) using spirometry and impulse oscillometry (IOS) in these populations are required. The objective of this study was to compare the two methods, spirometry and IOS, for SAD detection and its prevalence defined by spirometry and IOS in subjects with COPD and asthma with and without fixed airflow obstruction (FAO).

DESIGN

This is a cross-sectional study.

METHODS

Spirometric and IOS parameters were compared across four groups (COPD, asthma with FAO, asthma without FAO, and healthy subjects). SAD defined by spirometry and IOS criteria were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 262 subjects (67 COPD, 55 asthma with FAO, 101 asthma without FAO, and 39 healthy controls) were included. The prevalence of SAD defined by using IOS and spirometry criteria was significantly higher in patients with COPD (62.7 and 95.5%), asthma with FAO (63.6 and 98.2%), and asthma without FAO (38.6 and 19.8%) in comparison with healthy control (7.7 and 2.6%). IOS is more sensitive than spirometry in the detection of SAD in asthma without FAO (38.6% vs. 19.8%,  = 0.003) However, in subjects with FAO (COPD and asthma with FAO), spirometry is more sensitive than IOS to detect SAD (95.5% vs. 62.7%,  < 0.001 and 98.2% vs. 63.6%,  < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Small airway dysfunction was significantly detected in COPD and asthma with and without FAO. Although IOS shows more sensitivity than spirometry in the detection of SAD in asthma without FAO, spirometry is more sensitive than IOS in patients with FAO including COPD and asthma with FAO.

摘要

背景

小气道在慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)和哮喘的发病机制及预后中起主要作用。需要更多关于在这些人群中使用肺活量测定法和脉冲振荡法(IOS)检测小气道功能障碍(SAD)的数据。本研究的目的是比较肺活量测定法和IOS这两种方法在检测SAD方面的差异,以及由肺活量测定法和IOS定义的SAD在有和无固定气流阻塞(FAO)的COPD和哮喘患者中的患病率。

设计

这是一项横断面研究。

方法

对四组人群(COPD、有FAO的哮喘、无FAO的哮喘和健康受试者)的肺活量测定和IOS参数进行比较。比较由肺活量测定法和IOS标准定义的SAD。

结果

共纳入262名受试者(67名COPD患者、55名有FAO的哮喘患者、101名无FAO的哮喘患者和39名健康对照)。与健康对照(7.7%和2.6%)相比,使用IOS和肺活量测定法标准定义的SAD在COPD患者(62.7%和95.5%)、有FAO的哮喘患者(63.6%和98.2%)以及无FAO的哮喘患者(38.6%和19.8%)中的患病率显著更高。在无FAO的哮喘中,IOS在检测SAD方面比肺活量测定法更敏感(38.6%对19.8%,P = 0.003)。然而,在有FAO的受试者(COPD和有FAO的哮喘)中,肺活量测定法在检测SAD方面比IOS更敏感(分别为95.5%对62.7%,P < 0.001和98.2%对63.6%,P < 0.001)。

结论

在有和无FAO的COPD和哮喘中均显著检测到小气道功能障碍。尽管IOS在检测无FAO的哮喘中的SAD方面比肺活量测定法更敏感,但在包括COPD和有FAO的哮喘在内的有FAO的患者中,肺活量测定法比IOS更敏感。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验