| Literature DB >> 33331560 |
Iván Rodríguez-Núñez1, Gerardo Torres2, Soledad Luarte-Martinez1, Carlos Manterola3, Daniel Zenteno1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the strength of respiratory muscles and to compare maximum inspiratory (MIP) and expiratory (MEP) pressure and MEP/MIP ratio between patients with chronic respiratory diseases and healthy individuals.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33331560 PMCID: PMC7747779 DOI: 10.1590/1984-0462/2021/39/2019414
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Paul Pediatr ISSN: 0103-0582
Figure 1Flowchart of recruitment of study subjects.
General characteristics of the study groups.
|
Healthy (n=85) |
NMD (n=25) |
PIBO (n=27) | p-value* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years old) | 11.1±1.6 | 11.4 ± 2.9 | 11.7±2.8 | 0.384* |
| Gender (M/F) | 47/38 | 18/7 | 19/8 | 0.179** |
| Weight (kg) | 47.5± 13.1 | 46.5±13.2 | 44.1±11.4 | 0.483* |
| Height (cm) | 149.4± 10.5 | 145.5±9.5 | 151.3±11.4 | 0.300* |
NMD: neuromuscular disease; PIBO: post-infectious bronchiolitis obliterans; M: male; F: female. *One-way ANOVA; **chi-square test was used.
Spirometric values of patients with chronic respiratory disease.
|
NMD (n=25) |
PIBO (n=27) | p-value* | |
|---|---|---|---|
| FEV1 (l) | 1.6±0.5 | 1.5±0.6 | 0.338 |
| FEV1 (%) | 82.0±24.2 | 65.5±20.1 | 0.011 |
| FVC(l) | 1.9±0.6 | 2.3±0.9 | 0.080 |
| FVC (%) | 79.1±28.8 | 88.2±19.6 | 0.071 |
| FEV1/ FVC | 87.6±7.7 | 64.9±13.8 | <0.001 |
| FEF25-7 5 (l/m) | 2.0±1.2 | 1.0±0.7 | <0.001 |
| FEF25-75 (%) | 76.6±30.7 | 37.3±22.0 | <0.001 |
NMD: neuromuscular disease; PIBO: post-infectious bronchiolitis obliterans; FEV1: forced expiratory volume during the first second; FVC: forced vital capacity; FEF25-75: forced expiratory flow between the 25 and 75 percent of the forced vital capacity. Results are shown in absolute values (mean and standard deviation) and predictive values according to Knudson et al. *Independent sample Student’s t-test was used.
Respiratory muscle strength and the maximal expiratory pressure/maximal inspiratory pressure ratio of the study groups.
|
Healthy (n=85) |
NMD (n=25) |
PIBO (n=27) | p-value* | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIP (cmH2O) | 103.4±16.4 | 56.8±19.3a.b | 68.4±24.8a | <0.001 |
| MIP (%) | 100.8±16.6 | 54.9±18.1a | 65.6±24.8a | <0.001 |
| MEP (cmH2O) | 100.2±21.7 | 47.2±18.3a.b | 72.5±21.2a | <0.001 |
| MEP (%) | 75.2±17.0 | 34.9±15.4 a.b | 52.6±19.2a | <0.001 |
| MEP/MIP ratio | 0.97±0.1 | 0.87±0.3 a.b | 1.11±0.4 | 0.017* |
| %MEP/%MIP ratio | 0.75±0.1 | 0.64±0.2 a.b | 0.85±0.3 | 0.004* |
NMD: neuromuscular disease; PIBO: post-infectious bronchiolitis obliterans; MIP: maximal inspiratory pressure; MEP: maximal expiratory pressure; %: percentage of predictive values according to Contreras et al. a: statistical difference with healthy group (p<0.05); b: statistical difference with PIBO group (p<0.05). *Kruskal-Wallis test.
Correlation between the parameters of respiratory muscle strength and maximal expiratory pressure/maximal inspiratory pressure ratio.
|
Healthy (n=85) |
NMD (n=25) |
PIBO (n=27) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| MIP (cmH2O) | -0.17 | -0.44* | -0.40* |
| MIP (%)a | -0.10 | -0.24 | -0.46* |
| MEP (cmH2O) | 0.67*** | 0.42* | 0.43* |
| MEP (%)a | 0.69*** | 0.60** | 0.32 |
NMD: neuromuscular disease; PIBO: post-infectious bronchiolitis obliterans; MIP: maximal inspiratory pressure; MEP: maximal expiratory pressure; %: percentage of predictive values according to Contreras et al.; a: MIP and MEP expressed as relative value were correlated with %MEP/%MIP ratio; *<0.05; **<0.01; ***<0.001.
Figure 2Correlation between maximal expiratory pressure/maximal inspiratory pressure ratio and age.