Suppr超能文献

总呼气法比传统方法得出的 DLCO 和 TLC 值更高。

The total-breath method yields higher values of DLCO and TLC than the conventional method.

机构信息

Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Ziemssenstraße 5, Munich, 80336, Germany.

Ndd Medical Technologies, Zurich, Switzerland.

出版信息

BMC Pulm Med. 2024 Mar 13;24(1):127. doi: 10.1186/s12890-024-02932-y.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The 2017 ATS/ERS technical standard for measuring the single-breath diffusing capacity (DLCO) proposed the "rapid-gas-analyzer" (RGA) or, equivalently, "total-breath" (TB) method for the determination of total lung capacity (TLC). In this study, we compared DLCO and TLC values estimated using the TB and conventional method, and how estimated TLC using these two methods compared to that determined by body plethysmography.

METHOD

A total of 95 people with COPD (GOLD grades 1-4) and 23 healthy subjects were studied using the EasyOne Pro (ndd Medical Technologies, Switzerland) and Master Screen Body (Vyaire Medical, Höchberg, Germany).

RESULTS

On average the TB method resulted in higher values of DLCO (mean ± SD Δ = 0.469 ± 0.267; 95%CI: 0.420; 0.517 mmolmin-1kPa-1) and TLC (Δ = 0.495 ± 0.371; 95%CI: 0.427; 0.562 L) compared with the conventional method. In healthy subjects the ratio between TB and conventional DLCO was close to one. TLC estimated using both methods was lower than that determined by plethysmography. The difference was smaller for the TB method (Δ = 1.064 ± 0.740; 95%CI: 0.929; 1.199 L) compared with the conventional method (Δ = 1.558 ± 0.940; 95%CI: 1.387; 1.739 L). TLC from body plethysmography could be estimated as a function of TB TLC and FEV Z-Score with an accuracy (normalized root mean square difference) of 9.1%.

CONCLUSION

The total-breath method yielded higher values of DLCO and TLC than the conventional analysis, especially in subjects with COPD. TLC from the total-breath method can also be used to estimate plethysmographic TLC with better accuracy than the conventional method. The study is registered under clinicaltrial.gov NCT04531293.

摘要

背景

2017 年 ATS/ERS 技术标准提出了使用“快速气体分析仪”(RGA)或等效的“全呼”(TB)方法来测量单肺弥散量(DLCO),以确定肺总量(TLC)。在这项研究中,我们比较了使用 TB 和传统方法估计的 DLCO 和 TLC 值,以及使用这两种方法估计的 TLC 值与通过体描仪法确定的 TLC 值的比较。

方法

共 95 例 COPD 患者(GOLD 分级 1-4)和 23 例健康受试者使用 EasyOne Pro(ndd Medical Technologies,瑞士)和 Master Screen Body(Vyaire Medical,Höchberg,德国)进行研究。

结果

平均而言,TB 方法得出的 DLCO(平均值±标准差Δ=0.469±0.267;95%CI:0.420;0.517mmolmin-1kPa-1)和 TLC(Δ=0.495±0.371;95%CI:0.427;0.562L)值高于传统方法。在健康受试者中,TB 和传统 DLCO 之间的比值接近 1。使用两种方法估计的 TLC 值均低于体描仪法。TB 方法的差值较小(Δ=1.064±0.740;95%CI:0.929;1.199L),而传统方法的差值较大(Δ=1.558±0.940;95%CI:1.387;1.739L)。可以根据 TB TLC 和 FEV Z 分数来估计体描仪法 TLC,其准确性(归一化均方根差)为 9.1%。

结论

TB 方法得出的 DLCO 和 TLC 值高于传统分析,尤其是在 COPD 患者中。TB 方法的 TLC 值也可以用于估计体描仪法 TLC,其准确性优于传统方法。该研究已在 clinicaltrial.gov 注册,编号为 NCT04531293。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a66f/10936061/49d100678b11/12890_2024_2932_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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