Glívia Maria Barros Delmondes, Nathália Ferreira Santos Couto, Murilo Gominho Antunes Correia Junior, Amanda Bezerra da Silva Bonifácio, Ricardo de Freitas Dias, Jorge Bezerra, Marcos André de Moura Santos, Mauro Virgílio Gomes de Barros, Emília Chagas Costa, Marco Aurélio de Valois Correia Junior
{"title":"Single breath counting technique to assess pulmonary function: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Glívia Maria Barros Delmondes, Nathália Ferreira Santos Couto, Murilo Gominho Antunes Correia Junior, Amanda Bezerra da Silva Bonifácio, Ricardo de Freitas Dias, Jorge Bezerra, Marcos André de Moura Santos, Mauro Virgílio Gomes de Barros, Emília Chagas Costa, Marco Aurélio de Valois Correia Junior","doi":"10.1088/1752-7163/ad0647","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pulmonary function is usually assessed by measuring Vital Capacity (VC) using equipment such as a spirometer or ventilometer, but these are not always available to the population, as they are relatively expensive tests, difficult to transport and require trained professionals. However, the single breath counting technique (SBCT) appears as a possible alternative to respiratory function tests, to help in the pathophysiological understanding of lung diseases. The objective is to verify the applicability of the SBCT as a parameter for evaluating VC. This is a systematic review registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023383706) and used for PubMed<sup>®</sup>, Scientific Electronic Library Online, LILACS, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases of articles published until January 2023. Methodological quality regarding the risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and National Institutes of Health tools. Eleven of a total of 574 studies were included, of these, nine showed a correlation between VC and SBCT (weak in healthy, moderate in neuromuscular and strong in hospitalized patients). One study of hospitalized patients accurately identified a count value of 21 for a VC of 20 ml kg<sup>-1</sup>(Sensitivity = 94% and Specificity = 77%), and another estimated a count lower than 41 for a VC below 80% of predicted in patients with neuromuscular dystrophy (Sensitivity = 89% and Specificity = 62%), and another showed good intra and inter-examiner reproducibility in young, adult, and elderly populations. A meta-analysis of three studies showed a moderate correlation in subjects with neuromuscular diseases (<i>r</i>= 0.62, 95% CI = 0.52-0.71,<i>p</i>< 0.01). A high risk of bias was identified regarding the justification of the sample size and blinding of the evaluators. SBCT has been presented as an alternative to assess VC in the absence of specific equipment. There is a clear relationship between SBCT and VC, especially in neuromuscular and hospitalized individuals. New validation studies conducted with greater control of potential bias risks are necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":15306,"journal":{"name":"Journal of breath research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of breath research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/1752-7163/ad0647","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMICAL RESEARCH METHODS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Pulmonary function is usually assessed by measuring Vital Capacity (VC) using equipment such as a spirometer or ventilometer, but these are not always available to the population, as they are relatively expensive tests, difficult to transport and require trained professionals. However, the single breath counting technique (SBCT) appears as a possible alternative to respiratory function tests, to help in the pathophysiological understanding of lung diseases. The objective is to verify the applicability of the SBCT as a parameter for evaluating VC. This is a systematic review registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023383706) and used for PubMed®, Scientific Electronic Library Online, LILACS, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases of articles published until January 2023. Methodological quality regarding the risk of bias was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 and National Institutes of Health tools. Eleven of a total of 574 studies were included, of these, nine showed a correlation between VC and SBCT (weak in healthy, moderate in neuromuscular and strong in hospitalized patients). One study of hospitalized patients accurately identified a count value of 21 for a VC of 20 ml kg-1(Sensitivity = 94% and Specificity = 77%), and another estimated a count lower than 41 for a VC below 80% of predicted in patients with neuromuscular dystrophy (Sensitivity = 89% and Specificity = 62%), and another showed good intra and inter-examiner reproducibility in young, adult, and elderly populations. A meta-analysis of three studies showed a moderate correlation in subjects with neuromuscular diseases (r= 0.62, 95% CI = 0.52-0.71,p< 0.01). A high risk of bias was identified regarding the justification of the sample size and blinding of the evaluators. SBCT has been presented as an alternative to assess VC in the absence of specific equipment. There is a clear relationship between SBCT and VC, especially in neuromuscular and hospitalized individuals. New validation studies conducted with greater control of potential bias risks are necessary.
肺功能通常通过使用肺活量计或肺活量表等设备测量肺活量(VC)来评估,但这些设备并不总是适用于人群,因为它们是相对昂贵的测试,难以运输,并且需要训练有素的专业人员。然而,单次呼吸计数技术(SBCT)似乎是呼吸功能测试的一种可能的替代方法,有助于对肺部疾病的病理生理学理解。目的是验证SBCT作为评估VC参数的适用性。这是一项在国际前瞻性系统评价登记册(CRD42023383706)中注册的系统评价,用于PubMed®、SciELO、LILACS、EMBASE和Web of Science数据库中截至2023年1月发表的文章。使用QUADAS-2和NIH工具评估关于偏倚风险的方法学质量。共纳入574项研究中的11项,其中9项显示VC和SBCT之间存在相关性(健康患者较弱,神经肌肉患者中等,住院患者较强)。一项针对住院患者的研究准确地确定了20ml/kg VC的计数值为21(敏感性=94%,特异性=77%),另一项估计神经肌肉营养不良患者中VC低于预测值80%的计数值低于41(敏感性=89%,特异性=62%),而另一项研究在年轻、成年和老年人群中显示出良好的检查者内和检查者间再现性。一项对三项研究的荟萃分析显示,患有神经肌肉疾病的受试者之间存在中度相关性(r=0.62,95%CI=0.52-0.71,p
期刊介绍:
Journal of Breath Research is dedicated to all aspects of scientific breath research. The traditional focus is on analysis of volatile compounds and aerosols in exhaled breath for the investigation of exogenous exposures, metabolism, toxicology, health status and the diagnosis of disease and breath odours. The journal also welcomes other breath-related topics.
Typical areas of interest include:
Big laboratory instrumentation: describing new state-of-the-art analytical instrumentation capable of performing high-resolution discovery and targeted breath research; exploiting complex technologies drawn from other areas of biochemistry and genetics for breath research.
Engineering solutions: developing new breath sampling technologies for condensate and aerosols, for chemical and optical sensors, for extraction and sample preparation methods, for automation and standardization, and for multiplex analyses to preserve the breath matrix and facilitating analytical throughput. Measure exhaled constituents (e.g. CO2, acetone, isoprene) as markers of human presence or mitigate such contaminants in enclosed environments.
Human and animal in vivo studies: decoding the ''breath exposome'', implementing exposure and intervention studies, performing cross-sectional and case-control research, assaying immune and inflammatory response, and testing mammalian host response to infections and exogenous exposures to develop information directly applicable to systems biology. Studying inhalation toxicology; inhaled breath as a source of internal dose; resultant blood, breath and urinary biomarkers linked to inhalation pathway.
Cellular and molecular level in vitro studies.
Clinical, pharmacological and forensic applications.
Mathematical, statistical and graphical data interpretation.