Benjamin M Smith1, Eric A Hoffman2, Dan Rabinowitz3, Eugene Bleecker4, Stephanie Christenson5, David Couper6, Kathleen M Donohue7, Meilan K Han8, Nadia N Hansel9, Richard E Kanner10, Eric Kleerup11, Stephen Rennard12, R Graham Barr13. 1. Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. 2. Departments of Radiology, Medicine and Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA. 3. Department of Statistics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. 4. Department of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA. 6. Deparment of Biostatistics, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. 7. Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA. 8. Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 9. Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 10. Department of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. 11. Department of Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. 12. Department of Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA. 13. Department of Medicine, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: COPD is characterised by reduced airway lumen dimensions and fewer peripheral airways. Most studies of airway properties sample airways based upon lumen dimension or at random, which may bias comparisons given reduced airway lumen dimensions and number in COPD. We sought to compare central airway wall dimensions on CT in COPD and controls using spatially matched airways, thereby avoiding selection bias of airways in the lung. METHODS: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) COPD Study and Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcomes in COPD Study (SPIROMICS) recruited smokers with COPD and controls aged 50-79 years and 40-80 years, respectively. COPD was defined by current guidelines. Using CT image data, airway dimensions were measured for all central airway segments (generations 0-6) following 5 standardised paths into the lungs. Case-control airway comparisons were spatially matched by generation and adjusted for demographics, body size, smoking, CT dose, per cent emphysema, airway length and lung volume. RESULTS: Among 311 MESA COPD participants, airway wall areas at generations 3-6 were smaller in COPD compared with controls (all p<0.001). Among 1248 SPIROMICS participants, airway wall areas at generations 1-6 were smaller (all p<0.001), and this reduction was monotonic with increasing COPD severity (p<0.001). In both studies, sampling airways by lumen diameter or randomly resulted in a comparison of more proximal airways in COPD to more peripheral airways in controls (p<0.001) resulting in the appearance of thicker walls in COPD (p<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Airway walls are thinner in COPD when comparing spatially matched central airways. Other approaches to airway sampling result in comparisons of more proximal to more distal airways and potentially biased assessment of airway properties in COPD. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
BACKGROUND:COPD is characterised by reduced airway lumen dimensions and fewer peripheral airways. Most studies of airway properties sample airways based upon lumen dimension or at random, which may bias comparisons given reduced airway lumen dimensions and number in COPD. We sought to compare central airway wall dimensions on CT in COPD and controls using spatially matched airways, thereby avoiding selection bias of airways in the lung. METHODS: The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) COPD Study and Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcomes in COPD Study (SPIROMICS) recruited smokers with COPD and controls aged 50-79 years and 40-80 years, respectively. COPD was defined by current guidelines. Using CT image data, airway dimensions were measured for all central airway segments (generations 0-6) following 5 standardised paths into the lungs. Case-control airway comparisons were spatially matched by generation and adjusted for demographics, body size, smoking, CT dose, per cent emphysema, airway length and lung volume. RESULTS: Among 311 MESACOPDparticipants, airway wall areas at generations 3-6 were smaller in COPD compared with controls (all p<0.001). Among 1248 SPIROMICS participants, airway wall areas at generations 1-6 were smaller (all p<0.001), and this reduction was monotonic with increasing COPD severity (p<0.001). In both studies, sampling airways by lumen diameter or randomly resulted in a comparison of more proximal airways in COPD to more peripheral airways in controls (p<0.001) resulting in the appearance of thicker walls in COPD (p<0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Airway walls are thinner in COPD when comparing spatially matched central airways. Other approaches to airway sampling result in comparisons of more proximal to more distal airways and potentially biased assessment of airway properties in COPD. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Michel Montaudon; Patrick Berger; Gabriel de Dietrich; Achille Braquelaire; Roger Marthan; José Manuel Tunon-de-Lara; François Laurent Journal: Radiology Date: 2006-12-19 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Won-Dong Kim; Sean H Ling; Harvey O Coxson; John C English; John Yee; Robert D Levy; Peter D Paré; James C Hogg Journal: Chest Date: 2007-02-22 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Sanghun Choi; Eric A Hoffman; Sally E Wenzel; Mario Castro; Sean Fain; Nizar Jarjour; Mark L Schiebler; Kun Chen; Ching-Long Lin Journal: J Allergy Clin Immunol Date: 2017-01-29 Impact factor: 10.793
Authors: Surya P Bhatt; Sandeep Bodduluri; John D Newell; Eric A Hoffman; Jessica C Sieren; Meilan K Han; Mark T Dransfield; Joseph M Reinhardt Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2016-04-04 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Sanghun Choi; Eric A Hoffman; Sally E Wenzel; Mario Castro; Sean B Fain; Nizar N Jarjour; Mark L Schiebler; Kun Chen; Ching-Long Lin Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2015-03-26
Authors: Abigail L Koch; Robert H Brown; Han Woo; Alli C Brooker; Laura M Paulin; Hartmut Schneider; Alan R Schwartz; Gregory B Diette; Robert A Wise; Nadia N Hansel; Nirupama Putcha Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2020-01
Authors: Alejandro A Diaz; Thomas P Young; Diego J Maselli; Carlos H Martinez; Ritu Gill; Pietro Nardelli; Wei Wang; Gregory L Kinney; John E Hokanson; George R Washko; Raul San Jose Estepar Journal: Chest Date: 2016-11-24 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Mehmet Kesimer; Benjamin M Smith; Agathe Ceppe; Amina A Ford; Wayne H Anderson; R Graham Barr; Wanda K O'Neal; Richard C Boucher Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Michael H Cho; Peter J Castaldi; Craig P Hersh; Brian D Hobbs; R Graham Barr; Ruth Tal-Singer; Per Bakke; Amund Gulsvik; Raúl San José Estépar; Edwin J R Van Beek; Harvey O Coxson; David A Lynch; George R Washko; Nan M Laird; James D Crapo; Terri H Beaty; Edwin K Silverman Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2015-09-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Elizabeth C Oelsner; Victor E Ortega; Benjamin M Smith; Jennifer N Nguyen; Ani W Manichaikul; Eric A Hoffman; Xiuqing Guo; Kent D Taylor; Prescott G Woodruff; David J Couper; Nadia N Hansel; Fernando J Martinez; Robert Paine; Meilan K Han; Christopher Cooper; Mark T Dransfield; Gerard Criner; Jerry A Krishnan; Russell Bowler; Eugene R Bleecker; Stephen Peters; Stephen S Rich; Deborah A Meyers; Jerome I Rotter; R Graham Barr Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2019-09-15 Impact factor: 21.405