不同严重程度慢性阻塞性肺病患者膈肌偏移的超声评估

Kholod Tarek Fekri, Waleed Kamal Eldin El-Sorougi, Fatmaalzahraa Saad Abdalrazik
{"title":"不同严重程度慢性阻塞性肺病患者膈肌偏移的超声评估","authors":"Kholod Tarek Fekri, Waleed Kamal Eldin El-Sorougi, Fatmaalzahraa Saad Abdalrazik","doi":"10.1186/s43168-024-00315-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with dysfunctional diaphragmatic breathing we assess the diaphragmatic excursion at different stages of COPD patients by transthoracic ultrasound. The present study aimed to assess the diaphragmatic excursion at different stages of COPD patients by transthoracic ultrasound. In this observational case–control study, 80 COPD patients were included according to GOLD guidelines 2020 attending the Chest Clinic in Badr Hospital, Helwan University. All patients were divided equally into 5 groups according to FEV1 measured by spirometer: group (1) normal person; group (2) mild stage FEV1_80% predicted; group (3) moderate stage 50%_FEV1 < 80% predicted; group (4) severe stage 30%_FEV1 < 50% predicted; and group (5) very severe stage FEV1 < 30% predicted. We measured diaphragmatic movement in all these patients using ultrasound. The outcomes result of normal, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe groups in terms of post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC are 0.66 ± 0.05, 0.65 ± 0.05, 0.63 ± 0.04, 0.51 ± 0.068 respectively showed was a significant difference. There was a significant difference of FEV1 are 86.70 ± 5.62, 63.00 ± 13.81, 43.00 ± 6.78, 24.00 ± 4.17, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in diaphragmatic thickness at the end of normal expiration are 0.49 ± 0.12, 0.51 ± 0.09, 0.47 ± 0.16, 0.37 ± 0.07, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the diaphragmatic thickness during maximum inspiration are 0.70 ± 0.16, 0.8 ± 0.17, 0.64 ± 0.19, and 0.47 ± 0.08, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the diaphragmatic excursion during normal breathing are 2.45 ± 0.39, 1.78 ± 0.67, 1.86 ± 0.67, 1.09 ± 0.16, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in diaphragmatic Excursion during maximum inspiration are 4.41 ± 0.91, 3.83 ± 0.78, 3.36 ± 0.74, 2.36 ± 0.66 respectively (P < 0.001). The use of ultrasonography for assessing the diaphragmatic excursion. Sonographically determined diaphragmatic excursion strongly correlates with FEV1/FVC.","PeriodicalId":22426,"journal":{"name":"The Egyptian Journal of Bronchology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic excursion in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with different severities\",\"authors\":\"Kholod Tarek Fekri, Waleed Kamal Eldin El-Sorougi, Fatmaalzahraa Saad Abdalrazik\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s43168-024-00315-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with dysfunctional diaphragmatic breathing we assess the diaphragmatic excursion at different stages of COPD patients by transthoracic ultrasound. The present study aimed to assess the diaphragmatic excursion at different stages of COPD patients by transthoracic ultrasound. In this observational case–control study, 80 COPD patients were included according to GOLD guidelines 2020 attending the Chest Clinic in Badr Hospital, Helwan University. All patients were divided equally into 5 groups according to FEV1 measured by spirometer: group (1) normal person; group (2) mild stage FEV1_80% predicted; group (3) moderate stage 50%_FEV1 < 80% predicted; group (4) severe stage 30%_FEV1 < 50% predicted; and group (5) very severe stage FEV1 < 30% predicted. We measured diaphragmatic movement in all these patients using ultrasound. The outcomes result of normal, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe groups in terms of post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC are 0.66 ± 0.05, 0.65 ± 0.05, 0.63 ± 0.04, 0.51 ± 0.068 respectively showed was a significant difference. There was a significant difference of FEV1 are 86.70 ± 5.62, 63.00 ± 13.81, 43.00 ± 6.78, 24.00 ± 4.17, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in diaphragmatic thickness at the end of normal expiration are 0.49 ± 0.12, 0.51 ± 0.09, 0.47 ± 0.16, 0.37 ± 0.07, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the diaphragmatic thickness during maximum inspiration are 0.70 ± 0.16, 0.8 ± 0.17, 0.64 ± 0.19, and 0.47 ± 0.08, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the diaphragmatic excursion during normal breathing are 2.45 ± 0.39, 1.78 ± 0.67, 1.86 ± 0.67, 1.09 ± 0.16, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in diaphragmatic Excursion during maximum inspiration are 4.41 ± 0.91, 3.83 ± 0.78, 3.36 ± 0.74, 2.36 ± 0.66 respectively (P < 0.001). The use of ultrasonography for assessing the diaphragmatic excursion. Sonographically determined diaphragmatic excursion strongly correlates with FEV1/FVC.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22426,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Egyptian Journal of Bronchology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Egyptian Journal of Bronchology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43168-024-00315-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Egyptian Journal of Bronchology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s43168-024-00315-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

慢性阻塞性肺病(COPD)与膈肌呼吸功能障碍有关,我们通过经胸超声波评估了慢性阻塞性肺病患者不同阶段的膈肌偏移。本研究旨在通过经胸超声波评估慢性阻塞性肺病患者在不同阶段的膈肌偏移。在这项观察性病例对照研究中,赫勒万大学巴德尔医院胸科门诊根据 GOLD 2020 指南纳入了 80 名慢性阻塞性肺病患者。根据肺活量计测得的 FEV1 将所有患者平均分为 5 组:第 1 组为正常人;第 2 组为轻度 FEV1_80% 预测值;第 3 组为中度 50%_FEV1<80%预测值;第 4 组为重度 30%_FEV1<50%预测值;第 5 组为极重度 FEV1<30%预测值。我们使用超声波测量了所有这些患者的膈肌运动。结果显示,正常组、轻度组、中度组、重度组和极重度组患者在支气管扩张后的 FEV1/FVC 分别为 0.66 ± 0.05、0.65 ± 0.05、0.63 ± 0.04、0.51 ± 0.068,差异显著。FEV1 分别为(86.70 ± 5.62)、(63.00 ± 13.81)、(43.00 ± 6.78)、(24.00 ± 4.17),差异有学意义(P < 0.001)。正常呼气末的膈肌厚度分别为(0.49 ± 0.12)、(0.51 ± 0.09)、(0.47 ± 0.16)、(0.37 ± 0.07),差异有学意义(P < 0.001)。最大吸气时的膈肌厚度分别为(0.70 ± 0.16)、(0.8 ± 0.17)、(0.64 ± 0.19)和(0.47 ± 0.08),差异有学意义(P < 0.001)。正常呼吸时的膈肌偏移分别为 2.45 ± 0.39、1.78 ± 0.67、1.86 ± 0.67 和 1.09 ± 0.16,差异有学意义(P < 0.001)。最大吸气时的膈肌扩张分别为(4.41 ± 0.91)、(3.83 ± 0.78)、(3.36 ± 0.74)、(2.36 ± 0.66),差异有学意义(P < 0.001)。使用超声波评估膈肌偏移。超声波测定的膈肌张力与 FEV1/FVC 密切相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Ultrasound assessment of diaphragmatic excursion in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with different severities
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is associated with dysfunctional diaphragmatic breathing we assess the diaphragmatic excursion at different stages of COPD patients by transthoracic ultrasound. The present study aimed to assess the diaphragmatic excursion at different stages of COPD patients by transthoracic ultrasound. In this observational case–control study, 80 COPD patients were included according to GOLD guidelines 2020 attending the Chest Clinic in Badr Hospital, Helwan University. All patients were divided equally into 5 groups according to FEV1 measured by spirometer: group (1) normal person; group (2) mild stage FEV1_80% predicted; group (3) moderate stage 50%_FEV1 < 80% predicted; group (4) severe stage 30%_FEV1 < 50% predicted; and group (5) very severe stage FEV1 < 30% predicted. We measured diaphragmatic movement in all these patients using ultrasound. The outcomes result of normal, mild, moderate, severe, and very severe groups in terms of post-bronchodilator FEV1/FVC are 0.66 ± 0.05, 0.65 ± 0.05, 0.63 ± 0.04, 0.51 ± 0.068 respectively showed was a significant difference. There was a significant difference of FEV1 are 86.70 ± 5.62, 63.00 ± 13.81, 43.00 ± 6.78, 24.00 ± 4.17, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in diaphragmatic thickness at the end of normal expiration are 0.49 ± 0.12, 0.51 ± 0.09, 0.47 ± 0.16, 0.37 ± 0.07, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the diaphragmatic thickness during maximum inspiration are 0.70 ± 0.16, 0.8 ± 0.17, 0.64 ± 0.19, and 0.47 ± 0.08, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in the diaphragmatic excursion during normal breathing are 2.45 ± 0.39, 1.78 ± 0.67, 1.86 ± 0.67, 1.09 ± 0.16, respectively (P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in diaphragmatic Excursion during maximum inspiration are 4.41 ± 0.91, 3.83 ± 0.78, 3.36 ± 0.74, 2.36 ± 0.66 respectively (P < 0.001). The use of ultrasonography for assessing the diaphragmatic excursion. Sonographically determined diaphragmatic excursion strongly correlates with FEV1/FVC.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Severity, mortality, and incidence of venous thromboembolism in COVID-19 patients Accuracy of convex probe EBUS-TBNA versus FDG-PET/CT imaging in diagnosis and mediastinal staging of lung cancer patients; an Egyptian Experience Role of pleural manometry and transthoracic ultrasonography to predict entrapped lung Comparing the outcome of using high-flow nasal cannula oxygen therapy versus noninvasive ventilation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure The role of screening of patients proved to have gastroesophageal reflux disease by upper gastrointestinal endoscope for early detection of interstitial lung diseases
×
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