Can the single-breath alveolar volume be adjusted to estimate true total lung capacity?

IF 1.8 Q3 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM European Clinical Respiratory Journal Pub Date : 2025-03-01 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20018525.2025.2470002

Simon Kristoffer Høgh Rasmusen, Jann Mortensen

{"title":"Can the single-breath alveolar volume be adjusted to estimate true total lung capacity?","authors":"Simon Kristoffer Høgh Rasmusen, Jann Mortensen","doi":"10.1080/20018525.2025.2470002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Total lung capacity (TLC) measured with single-breath gas diffusion (TLCsb) is systematically lower than TLC measured with whole-body plethysmography (TLCwbp) especially in patients with obstructive defects. We aimed to develop and validate a regression correction equation to reduce the discrepancy between the two measurements of TLC. Second, we compared the ability to detect restriction (reduced TLC) from adjusted TLC measured by single-breath (TLCsbadj) with gold standard TLCwbp.Methods: Lung function data from 800 consecutive patients were analysed with multivariable linear regression. A group of 530 were included for model development, and 270 were used for model validation.Results: TLCsb was found to be on average 1.1 L lower than TLCwbp (p < 0.001). This difference increased with degree of airway obstruction. After adjustment TLCsbadj did not significantly differ from TLCwbp in obstructive and mixed obstructive-restrictive subjects. TLCsbadj had a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 99% to predict restriction on an individual basis, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of [-19.6%; 17.7%] percentage when comparing adjusted values of TLCsb with the true TLCwbp value.Conclusions: After adjustment TLCsb was no longer significantly underestimated in obstructive and mixed restrictive-obstructive groups compared to TLCwbp. The adjustment can be used on individual subjects to estimate restriction via the TLCsb, thereby making the single-breath gas diffusion method a more valid alternative than without adjustment, when compared with the gold standard whole-body plethysmography to measure TLC.","PeriodicalId":11872,"journal":{"name":"European Clinical Respiratory Journal","volume":"12 1","pages":"2470002"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11873942/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Clinical Respiratory Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20018525.2025.2470002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Total lung capacity (TLC) measured with single-breath gas diffusion (TLCsb) is systematically lower than TLC measured with whole-body plethysmography (TLCwbp) especially in patients with obstructive defects. We aimed to develop and validate a regression correction equation to reduce the discrepancy between the two measurements of TLC. Second, we compared the ability to detect restriction (reduced TLC) from adjusted TLC measured by single-breath (TLCsb_adj) with gold standard TLCwbp.

Methods: Lung function data from 800 consecutive patients were analysed with multivariable linear regression. A group of 530 were included for model development, and 270 were used for model validation.

Results: TLCsb was found to be on average 1.1 L lower than TLCwbp (p < 0.001). This difference increased with degree of airway obstruction. After adjustment TLCsb_adj did not significantly differ from TLCwbp in obstructive and mixed obstructive-restrictive subjects. TLCsb_adj had a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 99% to predict restriction on an individual basis, with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of [-19.6%; 17.7%] percentage when comparing adjusted values of TLCsb with the true TLCwbp value.

Conclusions: After adjustment TLCsb was no longer significantly underestimated in obstructive and mixed restrictive-obstructive groups compared to TLCwbp. The adjustment can be used on individual subjects to estimate restriction via the TLCsb, thereby making the single-breath gas diffusion method a more valid alternative than without adjustment, when compared with the gold standard whole-body plethysmography to measure TLC.

查看原文