Literature DB >> 27164980

Computerised respiratory sounds can differentiate smokers and non-smokers.

Ana Oliveira1,2, Ipek Sen3, Yasemin P Kahya3, Vera Afreixo2,4, Alda Marques5,6.   

Abstract

Cigarette smoking is often associated with the development of several respiratory diseases however, if diagnosed early, the changes in the lung tissue caused by smoking may be reversible. Computerised respiratory sounds have shown to be sensitive to detect changes within the lung tissue before any other measure, however it is unknown if it is able to detect changes in the lungs of healthy smokers. This study investigated the differences between computerised respiratory sounds of healthy smokers and non-smokers. Healthy smokers and non-smokers were recruited from a university campus. Respiratory sounds were recorded simultaneously at 6 chest locations (right and left anterior, lateral and posterior) using air-coupled electret microphones. Airflow (1.0-1.5 l/s) was recorded with a pneumotachograph. Breathing phases were detected using airflow signals and respiratory sounds with validated algorithms. Forty-four participants were enrolled: 18 smokers (mean age 26.2, SD = 7 years; mean FEV1 % predicted 104.7, SD = 9) and 26 non-smokers (mean age 25.9, SD = 3.7 years; mean FEV1 % predicted 96.8, SD = 20.2). Smokers presented significantly higher frequency at maximum sound intensity during inspiration [(M = 117, SD = 16.2 Hz vs. M = 106.4, SD = 21.6 Hz; t(43) = -2.62, p = 0.0081, d z  = 0.55)], lower expiratory sound intensities (maximum intensity: [(M = 48.2, SD = 3.8 dB vs. M = 50.9, SD = 3.2 dB; t(43) = 2.68, p = 0.001, d z  = -0.78)]; mean intensity: [(M = 31.2, SD = 3.6 dB vs. M = 33.7,SD = 3 dB; t(43) = 2.42, p = 0.001, d z  = 0.75)] and higher number of inspiratory crackles (median [interquartile range] 2.2 [1.7-3.7] vs. 1.5 [1.2-2.2], p = 0.081, U = 110, r = -0.41) than non-smokers. Significant differences between computerised respiratory sounds of smokers and non-smokers have been found. Changes in respiratory sounds are often the earliest sign of disease. Thus, computerised respiratory sounds might be a promising measure to early detect smoking related respiratory diseases.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Computerised auscultation; Crackles; Early diagnosis; Smoking; Sound spectrum

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27164980     DOI: 10.1007/s10877-016-9887-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   2.502


  32 in total

1.  Wheeze detection based on time-frequency analysis of breath sounds.

Authors:  Styliani A Taplidou; Leontios J Hadjileontiadis
Journal:  Comput Biol Med       Date:  2006-11-17       Impact factor: 4.589

2.  Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation.

Authors:  Catherine O Fritz; Peter E Morris; Jennifer J Richler
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2011-08-08

3.  Asymmetry of respiratory sounds and thoracic transmission.

Authors:  H Pasterkamp; S Patel; G R Wodicka
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 2.602

4.  Breath sounds and distribution of pulmonary ventilation.

Authors:  P Leblanc; P T Macklem; W R Ross
Journal:  Am Rev Respir Dis       Date:  1970-07

Review 5.  Early chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: definition, assessment, and prevention.

Authors:  Stephen I Rennard; M Bradley Drummond
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2015-05-02       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  The relationship between normal lung sounds, age, and gender.

Authors:  V Gross; A Dittmar; T Penzel; F Schüttler; P von Wichert
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 21.405

7.  Perception of urge-to-cough and dyspnea in healthy smokers with decreased cough reflex sensitivity.

Authors:  Masashi Kanezaki; Satoru Ebihara; Etsuhiro Nikkuni; Peijun Gui; Chihiro Suda; Takae Ebihara; Miyako Yamasaki; Masahiro Kohzuki
Journal:  Cough       Date:  2010-02-05

8.  Respiratory health screening using pulmonary function tests and lung sound analysis.

Authors:  N Gavriely; M Nissan; D W Cugell; A H Rubin
Journal:  Eur Respir J       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 16.671

9.  Computerized respiratory sounds: a comparison between patients with stable and exacerbated COPD.

Authors:  Cristina Jácome; Ana Oliveira; Alda Marques
Journal:  Clin Respir J       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 2.570

Review 10.  Exercise dyspnea in patients with COPD.

Authors:  Loredana Stendardi; Barbara Binazzi; Giorgio Scano
Journal:  Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis       Date:  2007
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.