| Literature DB >> 30249234 |
David Langton1,2, Alvin Ing3,4, Kim Bennetts5, Wei Wang6, Claude Farah3,7, Matthew Peters3,4, Virginia Plummer5,6, Francis Thien6,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In randomized controlled trials, bronchial thermoplasty (BT) has been proven to reduce symptoms in severe asthma, but the mechanisms by which this is achieved are uncertain as most studies have shown no improvement in spirometry. We postulated that BT might improve lung mechanics by altering airway resistance in the small airways of the lung in ways not measured by FEV1. This study aimed to evaluate changes in measures of gas trapping by body plethysmography.Entities:
Keywords: Bronchial thermoplasty; Residual volume; Severe asthma; Small airways dysfunction
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30249234 PMCID: PMC6154954 DOI: 10.1186/s12890-018-0721-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pulm Med ISSN: 1471-2466 Impact factor: 3.317
Dynamic Lung Function Pre and Post BT
| Parameter | Baseline | 6 months post | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prebronchodilator FEV1 (litres) | 1.50 ± 0.54 | 1.50 ± 0.56 | NS |
| Prebronchodilator FEV1 (%pred) | 57.8 ± 18.9 | 58.7 ± 18.2 | NS |
| Prebronchodilator VC (litres) | 2.80 ± 0.90 | 2.80 ± 0.90 | NS |
| Prebronchodilator VC (%pred) | 88.2 ± 17.8 | 87.5 ± 18.2 | NS |
| Prebronchodilator FEV1/VC (%) | 53.3 ± 12.3 | 53.9 ± 12.4 | NS |
| Bronchodilator response FEV1 (%) | 10.9 ± 13.8 | 10.6 ± 16.0 | NS |
| Postbronchodilator FEV1 (litres) | 1.65 ± 0.63 | 1.62 ± 0.69 | NS |
FEV forced expiratory volume in 1 s, VC vital capacity, %pred percent predicted value
Static Lung Function Pre bronchodilator
| Parameter | Baseline | 6 months | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| TLC (litres) | 5.92 ± 1.42 | 5.73 ± 1.41 | 0.008 |
| TLC (%pred) | 107 ± 16 | 103 ± 14 | 0.002 |
| RV (litres) | 3.00 ± 0.99 | 2.80 ± 0.83 | 0.003 |
| RV (%pred) | 146 ± 37 | 136 ± 29 | 0.002 |
| RV/TLC (%) | 50 ± 10 | 49 ± 9 | NS |
| FRC (litres) | 3.72 ± 1.08 | 3.57 ± 1.01 | 0.005 |
TLC total lung capacity, RV residual volume, FRC functional residual capacity
%pred percent predicted value
Fig. 1Percentage change in RV versus baseline FEV1% predicted
Fig. 2Percentage change in RV/TLC ratio versus FEV1% predicted
Subgroup comparison by baseline FEV1
| Parameter | Group A | Group B | p |
|---|---|---|---|
| n | 20 | 12 | |
| age | 61.5 ± 11.3 | 57.9 ± 12.5 | NS |
| BMI kg/m2 | 30.6 ± 7.6 | 30.2 ± 6.5 | NS |
| RF activations | 207 ± 62 | 210 ± 57 | NS |
| Baseline ACQ-5 | 3.0 ± 0.8 | 3.0 ± 0.9 | NS |
| Baseline FEV1 (%predicted) | 45.8 ± 8.3 | 77.7 ± 13.7 | – |
| Baseline RV (litres) | 3.5 ± 0.9 | 2.1 ± 0.4 | < 0.001 |
| Baseline RV (%predicted) | 164 ± 34 | 114 ± 18.7 | < 0.001 |
| Baseline RV/TLC (%) | 55.4 ± 8.6 | 42.3 ± 6.5 | < 0.001 |
| Post BT delta RV (mls) | − 326 ± 338 | + 40 ± 144 | < 0.001 |
| Post BT change RV (%) | −8.6 ± 8.4 | + 2.0 ± 7.4 | < 0.001 |
| Post BT change RV/TLC (%) | −6.5 ± 8.9 | + 7.1 ± 8.8 | < 0.001 |
p unpaired t-test