Restrictive spirometry versus restrictive lung function using the GLI reference values.
epidemiology
respiratory function tests
restrictive lung function
restrictive spirometry pattern
spirometry
total lung capacity
Journal
Clinical physiology and functional imaging
ISSN: 1475-097X
Titre abrégé: Clin Physiol Funct Imaging
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101137604
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2022
May 2022
Historique:
revised:
03
02
2022
received:
26
10
2021
accepted:
07
02
2022
pubmed:
1
3
2022
medline:
15
4
2022
entrez:
28
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Restrictive lung function may indicate various underlying diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different restrictive spirometry patterns (RSPs) to identify restrictive lung function (total lung capacity [TLC] < lower limit of normal [LLN]) according to reference values by the Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) in a wide age-ranged, general population sample. A general population sample (n = 607, age 23-72 years, smokers 18.8%) with proper dynamic spirometry and TLC measurements, was included. Accuracy of two main categories of RSP to identify TLC < LLN were evaluated: traditional RSPs (definition 1: FVC < 80% of predicted and FEV The prevalence of restrictive lung function (TLC < LLN) was 5.3%. The most accurate cut-offs for FVC to identify TLC < LLN were 85.5% for FVC% of predicted, and -1.0 for FVC Z-score. The traditional RSP definitions 1 and 2 had higher specificity (95.0% and 96.9%) but substantially lower sensitivity compared to RSP definitions 3 and 4. Based on the GLI reference values, the RSP definition FVC < LLN and FEV
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Restrictive lung function may indicate various underlying diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different restrictive spirometry patterns (RSPs) to identify restrictive lung function (total lung capacity [TLC] < lower limit of normal [LLN]) according to reference values by the Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) in a wide age-ranged, general population sample.
METHODS
METHODS
A general population sample (n = 607, age 23-72 years, smokers 18.8%) with proper dynamic spirometry and TLC measurements, was included. Accuracy of two main categories of RSP to identify TLC < LLN were evaluated: traditional RSPs (definition 1: FVC < 80% of predicted and FEV
RESULTS
RESULTS
The prevalence of restrictive lung function (TLC < LLN) was 5.3%. The most accurate cut-offs for FVC to identify TLC < LLN were 85.5% for FVC% of predicted, and -1.0 for FVC Z-score. The traditional RSP definitions 1 and 2 had higher specificity (95.0% and 96.9%) but substantially lower sensitivity compared to RSP definitions 3 and 4.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the GLI reference values, the RSP definition FVC < LLN and FEV
Identifiants
pubmed: 35225428
doi: 10.1111/cpf.12745
pmc: PMC9311670
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
181-189Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Clinical Physiology and Functional Imaging published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Scandinavian Society of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine.
Références
Eur Respir J. 2005 Sep;26(3):511-22
pubmed: 16135736
Respir Med. 2021 Jun;182:106394
pubmed: 33901787
Am Rev Respir Dis. 1991 Nov;144(5):1202-18
pubmed: 1952453
Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir. 1982 May-Jun;18(3):419-25
pubmed: 7074238
Respir Med. 2016 Nov;120:116-123
pubmed: 27817808
Chest. 1999 Mar;115(3):869-73
pubmed: 10084506
BMC Pulm Med. 2015 Mar 25;15:26
pubmed: 25887050
Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir. 1985 Nov-Dec;21(6):551-7
pubmed: 4074961
Chest. 2013 May;143(5):1395-1406
pubmed: 23715520
Eur Respir J Suppl. 1993 Mar;16:5-40
pubmed: 8499054
J Infect Dis. 2022 Apr 19;225(8):1308-1316
pubmed: 34979029
Ups J Med Sci. 1986;91(3):299-310
pubmed: 3811032
N Engl J Med. 1994 Jul 7;331(1):25-30
pubmed: 8202099
Eur Respir J. 2021 Mar 11;57(3):
pubmed: 33707167
Cancer. 1950 Jan;3(1):32-5
pubmed: 15405679
Chest. 2003 Jun;123(6):1939-46
pubmed: 12796171
Eur Respir J. 2005 Nov;26(5):948-68
pubmed: 16264058
Respiration. 2005 Sep-Oct;72(5):471-9
pubmed: 16210885
Am Rev Respir Dis. 1987 Nov;136(5):1285-98
pubmed: 3674589
Respir Med. 2008 Sep;102(9):1349-54
pubmed: 18599282
Respir Med. 2020 Nov;173:106017
pubmed: 33190739
Eur Respir J. 2005 Jul;26(1):153-61
pubmed: 15994402
Multidiscip Respir Med. 2015 Feb 28;10(1):7
pubmed: 25745559
Thorax. 2008 Sep;63 Suppl 5:v1-58
pubmed: 18757459
Eur Respir J. 2012 Dec;40(6):1324-43
pubmed: 22743675
BMC Pulm Med. 2020 Feb 27;20(1):55
pubmed: 32106839
Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2022 May;42(3):181-189
pubmed: 35225428
Pulmonology. 2021 Jul-Aug;27(4):328-337
pubmed: 33262076
Eur Respir J. 2008 Feb;31(2):391-5
pubmed: 17928313
J Bras Pneumol. 2010 Jul-Aug;36(4):460-7
pubmed: 20835593
Chest. 2016 Jan;149(1):238-51
pubmed: 26356330
Respir Med. 2013 Jan;107(1):98-106
pubmed: 23127573