{"title":"通过肺功能测试预测运动呼吸受限。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.pulmoe.2022.12.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Evaluation of unexplained exercise intolerance is best resolved by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) which enables the determination of the exercise limiting system in most cases. Traditionally, pulmonary function tests (PFTs) at rest are not used for the prediction of a respiratory limitation on CPET.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>We sought cut-off values on PFTs that might, <em>a priori</em>, rule-in or rule-out a respiratory limitation in CPET.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Patients who underwent CPET in our institute were divided into two groups according to spirometry: obstructive and non-obstructive. Each group was randomly divided 2:1 into derivation and validation cohorts respectively. We analyzed selected PFTs parameters in the derivation groups in order to establish maximal and minimal cut-off values for which a respiratory limitation could be ruled-in or ruled-out. We then validated these values in the validation cohorts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 593 patients who underwent a CPET, 126 were in the obstructive and 467 in the non-obstructive group. In patients with obstructive lung disease, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV<sub>1</sub>) ≥ 61% predicted could rule out a respiratory limitation, while FEV<sub>1</sub> ≤ 33% predicted was always associated with a respiratory limitation. For patients with non-obstructive spirometry, FEV<sub>1</sub> of ≥ 73% predicted could rule-out a respiratory limitation. Application of this algorithm might have saved up to 47% and 71% of CPETs in our obstructive and non-obstructive groups, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Presence or absence of a respiratory limitation on CPET can be predicted in some cases based on a PFTs performed at rest.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54237,"journal":{"name":"Pulmonology","volume":"30 5","pages":"Pages 452-458"},"PeriodicalIF":10.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2531043723000016/pdfft?md5=1ff4d9adf371592749df33b9cd7b6948&pid=1-s2.0-S2531043723000016-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prediction of exercise respiratory limitation from pulmonary function tests\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.pulmoe.2022.12.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Evaluation of unexplained exercise intolerance is best resolved by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) which enables the determination of the exercise limiting system in most cases. Traditionally, pulmonary function tests (PFTs) at rest are not used for the prediction of a respiratory limitation on CPET.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>We sought cut-off values on PFTs that might, <em>a priori</em>, rule-in or rule-out a respiratory limitation in CPET.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Patients who underwent CPET in our institute were divided into two groups according to spirometry: obstructive and non-obstructive. Each group was randomly divided 2:1 into derivation and validation cohorts respectively. We analyzed selected PFTs parameters in the derivation groups in order to establish maximal and minimal cut-off values for which a respiratory limitation could be ruled-in or ruled-out. We then validated these values in the validation cohorts.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Of 593 patients who underwent a CPET, 126 were in the obstructive and 467 in the non-obstructive group. In patients with obstructive lung disease, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV<sub>1</sub>) ≥ 61% predicted could rule out a respiratory limitation, while FEV<sub>1</sub> ≤ 33% predicted was always associated with a respiratory limitation. For patients with non-obstructive spirometry, FEV<sub>1</sub> of ≥ 73% predicted could rule-out a respiratory limitation. Application of this algorithm might have saved up to 47% and 71% of CPETs in our obstructive and non-obstructive groups, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Presence or absence of a respiratory limitation on CPET can be predicted in some cases based on a PFTs performed at rest.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pulmonology\",\"volume\":\"30 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 452-458\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":10.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2531043723000016/pdfft?md5=1ff4d9adf371592749df33b9cd7b6948&pid=1-s2.0-S2531043723000016-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pulmonology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2531043723000016\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pulmonology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2531043723000016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prediction of exercise respiratory limitation from pulmonary function tests
Background
Evaluation of unexplained exercise intolerance is best resolved by cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) which enables the determination of the exercise limiting system in most cases. Traditionally, pulmonary function tests (PFTs) at rest are not used for the prediction of a respiratory limitation on CPET.
Objective
We sought cut-off values on PFTs that might, a priori, rule-in or rule-out a respiratory limitation in CPET.
Methods
Patients who underwent CPET in our institute were divided into two groups according to spirometry: obstructive and non-obstructive. Each group was randomly divided 2:1 into derivation and validation cohorts respectively. We analyzed selected PFTs parameters in the derivation groups in order to establish maximal and minimal cut-off values for which a respiratory limitation could be ruled-in or ruled-out. We then validated these values in the validation cohorts.
Results
Of 593 patients who underwent a CPET, 126 were in the obstructive and 467 in the non-obstructive group. In patients with obstructive lung disease, forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) ≥ 61% predicted could rule out a respiratory limitation, while FEV1 ≤ 33% predicted was always associated with a respiratory limitation. For patients with non-obstructive spirometry, FEV1 of ≥ 73% predicted could rule-out a respiratory limitation. Application of this algorithm might have saved up to 47% and 71% of CPETs in our obstructive and non-obstructive groups, respectively.
Conclusion
Presence or absence of a respiratory limitation on CPET can be predicted in some cases based on a PFTs performed at rest.
PulmonologyMedicine-Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
CiteScore
14.30
自引率
5.10%
发文量
159
审稿时长
19 days
期刊介绍:
Pulmonology (previously Revista Portuguesa de Pneumologia) is the official journal of the Portuguese Society of Pulmonology (Sociedade Portuguesa de Pneumologia/SPP). The journal publishes 6 issues per year and focuses on respiratory system diseases in adults and clinical research. It accepts various types of articles including peer-reviewed original articles, review articles, editorials, and opinion articles. The journal is published in English and is freely accessible through its website, as well as Medline and other databases. It is indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded, Journal of Citation Reports, Index Medicus/MEDLINE, Scopus, and EMBASE/Excerpta Medica.