| 1. |
- Torén, Kjell, 1952, et al.
(författare)
-
Measures of bronchodilator response of FEV1, FVC and SVC in a Swedish general population sample aged 50-64 years, the SCAPIS Pilot Study
- 2017
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1178-2005. ; 12, s. 973-980
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Data are lacking from general population studies on how to define changes in lung function after bronchodilation. This study aimed to analyze different measures of bronchodilator response of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and slow vital capacity (SVC). Materials and methods: Data were derived from the Swedish Cardiopulmonary Bioimage Study (SCAPIS) Pilot study. This analysis comprised 1,050 participants aged 50-64 years from the general population. Participants were investigated using a questionnaire, and FEV1, FVC and SVC were recorded before and 15 minutes after inhalation of 400 mu g of salbutamol. A bronchodilator response was defined as the relative change from baseline value expressed as the difference in units of percent predicted normal. Predictors of bronchodilator responses were assessed using multiple linear regression models. Airway obstruction was defined as FEV1/FVC ratio below lower limit of normal (LLN) before bronchodilation, and COPD was defined as an FEV1/FVC ratio below LLN after bronchodilation. Physician-diagnosed asthma was defined as an affirmative answer to " Have you ever had asthma diagnosed by a physician?". Asymptomatic never-smokers were defined as those not reporting physician-diagnosed asthma, physician-diagnosed COPD or emphysema, current wheeze or chronic bronchitis and being a lifelong never-smoker. Results: Among all subjects, the greatest bronchodilator responses (FEV1, FVC and SVC) were found in subjects with asthma or COPD. The upper 95th percentile of bronchodilator responses in asymptomatic never-smokers was 8.7% for FEV1, 4.2% for FVC and 5.0% for SVC. The bronchodilator responses were similar between men and women. In a multiple linear regression model comprising all asymptomatic never-smokers, the bronchodilator response of FEV1 was significantly associated with airway obstruction and height. Conclusion: When the bronchodilator response in asymptomatic never-smokers is reported as the difference in units of predicted normal, significant reversibility of FEV1, FVC and SVC to bronchodilators is 9%, 4% and 5%, respectively.
|
|
| 2. |
- Torén, Kjell, 1952, et al.
(författare)
-
Vital capacity and COPD: the Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS)
- 2016
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1178-2005. ; 11:1, s. 927-933
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Spirometric diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is based on the ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1)/vital capacity (VC), either as a fixed value <0.7 or below the lower limit of normal (LLN). Forced vital capacity (FVC) is a proxy for VC. The first aim was to compare the use of FVC and VC, assessed as the highest value of FVC or slow vital capacity (SVC), when assessing the FEV1/VC ratio in a general population setting. The second aim was to evaluate the characteristics of subjects with COPD who obtained a higher SVC than FVC. Methods: Subjects (n=1,050) aged 50-64 years were investigated with FEV1, FVC, and SVC after bronchodilation. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) COPDFVC was defined as FEV1/FVC <0.7, GOLDCOPD(VC) as FEV1/VC <0.7 using the maximum value of FVC or SVC, LLNCOPDFVC as FEV1/FVC below the LLN, and LLNCOPDVC as FEV1/VC below the LLN using the maximum value of FVC or SVC. Results: Prevalence of GOLDCOPD(FVC) was 10.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8.2-12.0) and the prevalence of LLNCOPDFVC was 9.5% (95% CI 7.8-11.4). When estimates were based on VC, the prevalence became higher; 16.4% (95% CI 14.3-18.9) and 15.6% (95% CI 13.5-17.9) for GOLDCOPD(VC) and LLNCOPDVC, respectively. The group of additional subjects classified as having COPD based on VC, had lower FEV1, more wheeze and higher residual volume compared to subjects without any COPD. Conclusion: The prevalence of COPD was significantly higher when the ratio FEV1/VC was calculated using the highest value of SVC or FVC compared with using FVC only. Subjects classified as having COPD when using the VC concept were more obstructive and with indications of air trapping. Hence, the use of only FVC when assessing airflow limitation may result in a considerable under diagnosis of subjects with mild COPD.
|
|
