Bronchodilator responsiveness in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: prevalence, significance, and clinical implications.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2024-11-27 DOI:10.1097/MCP.0000000000001143
Ashutosh N Aggarwal, Ritesh Agarwal
{"title":"Bronchodilator responsiveness in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: prevalence, significance, and clinical implications.","authors":"Ashutosh N Aggarwal, Ritesh Agarwal","doi":"10.1097/MCP.0000000000001143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) is often considered a key feature distinguishing asthma from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, recent evidence suggests that BDR alone may not be a reliable discriminator between these conditions. There is still no consensus on BDR definitions and testing protocols. Additionally, it remains unclear whether BDR is linked to a specific COPD phenotype or influences treatment responses. Our review of recent literature attempts to clarify some of these issues.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>A significant proportion of COPD patients demonstrate BDR, but the variability in testing procedures and definitions makes it challenging to draw any definite conclusion. There is no evident association between BDR and specific COPD characteristics. A few studies suggest that BDR may be associated with marginally better treatment response and disease outcomes in COPD. The impact of recent changes in BDR definitions on clinical practice remains to be fully understood.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>There is still no clear, clinically relevant threshold to define BDR. BDR is an unreliable discriminator to differentiate asthma from COPD and is not consistently linked to any specific COPD phenotype, treatment response, or disease outcomes. Further research is needed to refine the definitions and implications of BDR in COPD.</p>","PeriodicalId":11090,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"126-134"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCP.0000000000001143","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) is often considered a key feature distinguishing asthma from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, recent evidence suggests that BDR alone may not be a reliable discriminator between these conditions. There is still no consensus on BDR definitions and testing protocols. Additionally, it remains unclear whether BDR is linked to a specific COPD phenotype or influences treatment responses. Our review of recent literature attempts to clarify some of these issues.

Recent findings: A significant proportion of COPD patients demonstrate BDR, but the variability in testing procedures and definitions makes it challenging to draw any definite conclusion. There is no evident association between BDR and specific COPD characteristics. A few studies suggest that BDR may be associated with marginally better treatment response and disease outcomes in COPD. The impact of recent changes in BDR definitions on clinical practice remains to be fully understood.

Summary: There is still no clear, clinically relevant threshold to define BDR. BDR is an unreliable discriminator to differentiate asthma from COPD and is not consistently linked to any specific COPD phenotype, treatment response, or disease outcomes. Further research is needed to refine the definitions and implications of BDR in COPD.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
慢性阻塞性肺病的支气管扩张剂反应性:发病率、意义和临床影响。
审查目的:支气管扩张剂反应性(BDR)通常被认为是区分哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)的关键特征。然而,最近的证据表明,仅凭支气管扩张剂反应性可能并不能可靠地区分这两种疾病。目前对 BDR 的定义和检测方案仍未达成共识。此外,BDR 是否与特定的慢性阻塞性肺病表型有关或影响治疗反应,目前仍不清楚。我们对近期文献的回顾试图澄清其中的一些问题:相当一部分慢性阻塞性肺病患者表现出 BDR,但由于测试程序和定义的差异,很难得出任何明确的结论。BDR 与特定慢性阻塞性肺病特征之间没有明显的关联。少数研究表明,BDR 可能与慢性阻塞性肺病稍好的治疗反应和疾病预后有关。摘要:目前仍没有明确的、与临床相关的阈值来定义 BDR。BDR 是区分哮喘和慢性阻塞性肺病的一个不可靠的鉴别指标,与任何特定的慢性阻塞性肺病表型、治疗反应或疾病预后都没有一致的联系。需要进一步研究来完善 BDR 在慢性阻塞性肺病中的定义和影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine is a highly regarded journal offering insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews, covering key subjects such as asthma; cystic fibrosis; infectious diseases; diseases of the pleura; and sleep and respiratory neurobiology. Published bimonthly, each issue of Current Opinion in Pulmonary Medicine introduces world renowned guest editors and internationally recognized academics within the pulmonary field, delivering a widespread selection of expert assessments on the latest developments from the most recent literature.
期刊最新文献
Household air pollution and respiratory health in Africa: persistent risk and unchanged health burdens. Pulmonary embolism work-up in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations: what is the best strategy for clinicians? The bronchiectasis microbiome: current understanding and treatment implications. Impact of occupational exposures in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: current understanding and knowledge gaps. Abnormal spirometry in individuals with a smoking history and no known obstructive lung disease: current understanding and clinical implications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1