S D Aaron1, R E Dales, P Cardinal. 1. Department of Medicine, Ottawa General Hospital, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. saaron@ogh.on.ca
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy with which spirometric measurements of FVC and expiratory flow rates can diagnose the presence of a restrictive impairment. DESIGN: The pulmonary function tests of 1,831 consecutive white adult patients who had undergone both spirometry and lung volume measurements on the same visit over a 2-year period were analyzed. The probability of restrictive pulmonary impairment, defined as a reduced total lung capacity (TLC) below the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval, was determined for each of several categoric classifications of the spirometric data, and additionally for each of several interval levels of the FVC and the FEV1/FVC ratio. SETTING: A large clinical laboratory in a university teaching hospital using quality-assured and standardized spirometry and lung volume measurement techniques according to American Thoracic Society standards. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-five of 1,831 patients (12.3%) had a restrictive defect. The positive predictive value of spirometry for predicting restriction was relatively low; of 470 patients with a low FVC on spirometry, only 41% had restriction confirmed on lung volume measurements. When the analysis was confined to the 264 patients with a restrictive pattern on spirometry (ie, low FVC and normal or above normal FEV1/FVC ratio), the positive predictive value was 58%. Conversely, spirometry had a very favorable negative predictive value; only 2.4% of patients (32 of 1,361) with a normal vital capacity (VC) on spirometry had a restrictive defect by TLC measurement. The probability of a restrictive defect was directly and linearly related to the degree of reduction of FVC when the FVC was < 80% of predicted (p = 6.002). Combining the FVC and the FEV1/FVC ratio improved the predictive ability of spirometry; for all values of FVC < 80% of the predicted amount, the likelihood of restrictive disease increased as the FEV1/FVC ratio increased. CONCLUSIONS: Spirometry is very useful at excluding a restrictive defect. When the VC is within the normal range, the probability of a restrictive defect is < 3%, and unless restrictive lung disease is suspected a priori, measurement of lung volumes can be avoided. However, spirometry is not able to accurately predict lung restriction; < 60% of patients with a classical spirometric restrictive pattern had pulmonary restriction confirmed on lung volume measurements. For these patients, measurement of the TLC is needed to confirm a true restrictive defect.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy with which spirometric measurements of FVC and expiratory flow rates can diagnose the presence of a restrictive impairment. DESIGN: The pulmonary function tests of 1,831 consecutive white adult patients who had undergone both spirometry and lung volume measurements on the same visit over a 2-year period were analyzed. The probability of restrictive pulmonary impairment, defined as a reduced total lung capacity (TLC) below the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval, was determined for each of several categoric classifications of the spirometric data, and additionally for each of several interval levels of the FVC and the FEV1/FVC ratio. SETTING: A large clinical laboratory in a university teaching hospital using quality-assured and standardized spirometry and lung volume measurement techniques according to American Thoracic Society standards. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-five of 1,831 patients (12.3%) had a restrictive defect. The positive predictive value of spirometry for predicting restriction was relatively low; of 470 patients with a low FVC on spirometry, only 41% had restriction confirmed on lung volume measurements. When the analysis was confined to the 264 patients with a restrictive pattern on spirometry (ie, low FVC and normal or above normal FEV1/FVC ratio), the positive predictive value was 58%. Conversely, spirometry had a very favorable negative predictive value; only 2.4% of patients (32 of 1,361) with a normal vital capacity (VC) on spirometry had a restrictive defect by TLC measurement. The probability of a restrictive defect was directly and linearly related to the degree of reduction of FVC when the FVC was < 80% of predicted (p = 6.002). Combining the FVC and the FEV1/FVC ratio improved the predictive ability of spirometry; for all values of FVC < 80% of the predicted amount, the likelihood of restrictive disease increased as the FEV1/FVC ratio increased. CONCLUSIONS: Spirometry is very useful at excluding a restrictive defect. When the VC is within the normal range, the probability of a restrictive defect is < 3%, and unless restrictive lung disease is suspected a priori, measurement of lung volumes can be avoided. However, spirometry is not able to accurately predict lung restriction; < 60% of patients with a classical spirometric restrictive pattern had pulmonary restriction confirmed on lung volume measurements. For these patients, measurement of the TLC is needed to confirm a true restrictive defect.
Authors: Emily S Wan; John E Hokanson; James R Murphy; Elizabeth A Regan; Barry J Make; David A Lynch; James D Crapo; Edwin K Silverman Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2011-04-14 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Carlos A Vaz Fragoso; Thomas M Gill; Gail McAvay; Henry Klar Yaggi; Peter H Van Ness; John Concato Journal: J Investig Med Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 2.895
Authors: David J Lederer; Paul L Enright; Steven M Kawut; Eric A Hoffman; Gary Hunninghake; Edwin J R van Beek; John H M Austin; Rui Jiang; Gina S Lovasi; R Graham Barr Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2009-06-19 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Surya P Bhatt; Young-Il Kim; James M Wells; William C Bailey; Joe W Ramsdell; Marilyn G Foreman; Robert L Jensen; Douglas S Stinson; Carla G Wilson; David A Lynch; Barry J Make; Mark T Dransfield Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2014-03