Restrictive spirometry versus restrictive lung function using the GLI reference values.

Clin Physiol Funct Imaging

Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Section of Sustainable Health/the OLIN Unit, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.

Published: May 2022

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to evaluate how well different restrictive spirometry patterns (RSPs) can identify restrictive lung function (low total lung capacity) using reference values from the Global Lung Function Initiative in a diverse age group.
  • A sample of 607 individuals was analyzed, comparing traditional RSP definitions with those based on Youden’s method, and found that 5.3% of participants had restrictive lung function.
  • The research concluded that while traditional definitions are highly specific for confirming restrictive lung function, the newer method with an FVC cutoff of 85.5% provides a better balance of sensitivity and specificity, making it more suitable for screening purposes.

Article Abstract

Background: Restrictive lung function may indicate various underlying diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of different restrictive spirometry patterns (RSPs) to identify restrictive lung function (total lung capacity [TLC] < lower limit of normal [LLN]) according to reference values by the Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) in a wide age-ranged, general population sample.

Methods: A general population sample (n = 607, age 23-72 years, smokers 18.8%) with proper dynamic spirometry and TLC measurements, was included. Accuracy of two main categories of RSP to identify TLC < LLN were evaluated: traditional RSPs (definition 1: FVC < 80% of predicted and FEV /FVC ≥ 0.7 and definition 2: FVC < LLN and FEV /FVC ≥ LLN) and RSPs defined by Youden's method (definition 3: FVC < 85.5% of predicted and FEV /FVC ≥ LLN and definition 4: FVC Z-score < -1.0 and FEV /FVC ≥ LLN).

Results: The prevalence of restrictive lung function (TLC < LLN) was 5.3%. The most accurate cut-offs for FVC to identify TLC < LLN were 85.5% for FVC% of predicted, and -1.0 for FVC Z-score. The traditional RSP definitions 1 and 2 had higher specificity (95.0% and 96.9%) but substantially lower sensitivity compared to RSP definitions 3 and 4.

Conclusion: Based on the GLI reference values, the RSP definition FVC < LLN and FEV /FVC ≥ LLN yielded the highest specificity and may appropriately be used to rule out restrictive lung function. The RSP definition with the most favourable trade-off between sensitivity and specificity, FVC < 85.5% of predicted and FEV /FVC ≥ LLN, may serve as an alternative with higher sensitivity for screening.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9311670PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cpf.12745DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

restrictive lung
12
lung function
12
restrictive spirometry
8
restrictive
5
spirometry versus
4
versus restrictive
4
lung
4
function gli
4
gli reference
4
reference values
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!