The Journal of asthma : official journal of the Association for the Care of Asthma · 2018
Impulse oscillometry and spirometry exhibit different features of lung function in bronchodilation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sheen Youn Ho, Jee Hye Mi, Ha Eun Kyo, Jang Ho Min, Lee Seung Jin, Lee Shinhae, Lee Kyung Suk, Jung Young-Ho, Choi Sun Hee, Sohn Myung Hyun, Han Man Yong
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Bronchodilator responses (BDRs) from impulse oscillometry (IOS) are not interchangeable with those from spirometry. We aimed to identify the characteristics of children with small airway hyperresponsiveness and to determine whether BDR from IOS provides an important supplement to BDR from spirometry.
METHODS: The records of 592 children with asthma or suspected asthma who underwent spirometric and oscillometric BDRs were retrospectively reviewed. Oscillometric BDR was defined as positive when relative or absolute changes of Rrs5 or Xrs5 were beyond two standard deviations and spirometric BDR as positive when absolute change of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was ≥12%. Subjects were classified as positive for spirometric BDR only, positive for oscillometric BDR only, positive for both BDRs, or negative for both BDRs.
RESULTS: The results indicated that 101 (17.6%) subjects were positive for spirometric BDR only, 49 (8.5%) positive for oscillometric BDR only, 48 (8.3%) positive for both BDRs, and 377 (65.6%) negative for both BDRs. The agreement between spirometric and oscillometric BDRs was poor. Baseline FEV1, Rrs5, and Xrs5 values strongly influenced the BDRs. Subjects positive for oscillometric BDR only were found to be younger than those positive for spirometric BDR only (P < 0.001). Subjects positive for both BDRs were more likely to have asthma, atopic dermatitis, wheezing apart from cold, or decreased baseline lung function relative to those positive in either test (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: There was a low concordance between spirometric and oscillometric BDRs. Use of IOS to detect small airway hyperresponsiveness may add more information about a clinical profile of subjects with asthma.
METHODS: The records of 592 children with asthma or suspected asthma who underwent spirometric and oscillometric BDRs were retrospectively reviewed. Oscillometric BDR was defined as positive when relative or absolute changes of Rrs5 or Xrs5 were beyond two standard deviations and spirometric BDR as positive when absolute change of forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) was ≥12%. Subjects were classified as positive for spirometric BDR only, positive for oscillometric BDR only, positive for both BDRs, or negative for both BDRs.
RESULTS: The results indicated that 101 (17.6%) subjects were positive for spirometric BDR only, 49 (8.5%) positive for oscillometric BDR only, 48 (8.3%) positive for both BDRs, and 377 (65.6%) negative for both BDRs. The agreement between spirometric and oscillometric BDRs was poor. Baseline FEV1, Rrs5, and Xrs5 values strongly influenced the BDRs. Subjects positive for oscillometric BDR only were found to be younger than those positive for spirometric BDR only (P < 0.001). Subjects positive for both BDRs were more likely to have asthma, atopic dermatitis, wheezing apart from cold, or decreased baseline lung function relative to those positive in either test (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: There was a low concordance between spirometric and oscillometric BDRs. Use of IOS to detect small airway hyperresponsiveness may add more information about a clinical profile of subjects with asthma.