| Literature DB >> 33364404 |
Sungjin A Song1,2, Alena Santeerapharp3, Kanittha Choksawad4, Ramon A Franco1,2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the reliability of pulmonary function testing compared to endoscopic grading in the assessment of subglottic stenosis.Entities:
Keywords: Cotton‐Myer grading; laryngotracheal stenosis; pulmonary function testing; subglottic stenosis
Year: 2020 PMID: 33364404 PMCID: PMC7752090 DOI: 10.1002/lio2.492
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol ISSN: 2378-8038
Patient characteristics of included subglottic stenosis patients (n = 45)
| Characteristic | n (%) |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Female | 44 (97.8) |
| Male | 1 (0.2) |
|
| |
| Mean (±SD) | 50.33 (±13.96) |
| Range | 18‐73 |
|
| |
| Idiopathic | 44 (97.8) |
| GPA | 1 (0.2) |
| Trauma | 0 |
| Other | 0 |
|
| |
| Never smoker | 40 (88.9) |
| Former smoker | 5 (11.1) |
| Current smoker | 0 |
Interrater reliability of Cotton‐Myer grading of 45 subglottic stenosis endoscopic images
| Fleiss' kappa | 95% CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall | 0.370 | 0.283‐0.456 | <.01 |
| Cotton‐Myer I | −0.103 | −0.386‐0.179 | 0.474 |
| Cotton‐Myer II | 0.052 | −0.140‐0.244 | 0.597 |
| Cotton‐Myer III | 0.045 | −1.01‐0.191 | 0.547 |
Abbreviation: CI, confidence interval.
Intraclass correlation of 45 endoscopic images of subglottic stenosis and corresponding pulmonary function tests (PFTs). Estimated percent obstruction (% stenosis) was the same as the Cotton‐Myer grading system. Here we see the variability of using the Cotton‐Myer grading system between the different physician graders vs PFTs. % stenosis has a lower intraclass correlation compared to any of the PFT parameters (PEF, PIF, PEF%, TPF), which have excellent reliability both overall and within each Cotton‐Myer grade group
| Correlation | 95% CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| % stenosis | 0.712 | 0.601‐0.808 | <.01 |
| PEF | 0.966 | 0.945‐0.980 | <.01 |
| PIF | 0.958 | 0.933‐0.975 | <.01 |
| PEF% | 0.956 | 0.930‐0.974 | <.01 |
| TPF | 0.985 | 0.975‐0.991 | <.01 |
|
| |||
| % stenosis | 0.450 | 0.123‐0.782 | .02 |
| PEF | 0.970 | 0.904‐0.993 | <.01 |
| PIF | 0.944 | 0.827‐0.988 | <.01 |
| PEF% | 0.970 | 0.903‐0.993 | <.01 |
| TPF | 0.984 | 0.948‐0.997 | <.01 |
|
| |||
| % stenosis | 0.061 | −0.150‐0.468 | .303 |
| PEF | 0.968 | 0.905‐0.992 | <.01 |
| PIF | 0.949 | 0.851‐0.987 | <.01 |
| PEF% | 0.915 | 0.763‐0.978 | <.01 |
| TPF | 0.987 | 0.961‐0.997 | <.01 |
|
| |||
| % stenosis | 0.159 | −0.001‐0.375 | .026 |
| PEF | 0.963 | 0.931‐0.981 | <.01 |
| PIF | 0.963 | 0.932‐0.981 | <.01 |
| PEF% | 0.962 | 0.930‐0.981 | <.01 |
| TPF | 0.984 | 0.971‐0.992 | <.01 |
Abbreviations: PEF, peak expiratory flow; PEF%, peak expiratory flow percentage; PIF, peak inspiratory flow, TPF; total peak flow.
Intraclass correlation: Values less than 0.5—poor; between 0.5 and 0.75—moderate; between 0.75 and 0.9—good; greater than 0.90—excellent reliability.
FIGURE 1The variability of the estimated percent obstruction (% stenosis) and peak expiratory flow percentage (PEF%) of Cotton‐Myer grade I patients. The superior reliability of PEF% is seen in that the spread of the PEF% for each patient is much smaller and tighter (gray) compared to the much larger range (wider bars) for % stenosis (black)
FIGURE 2The variability of the estimated percent obstruction (% stenosis) and peak expiratory flow percentage (PEF%) of Cotton‐Myer grade II patients. The superior reliability of PEF% is seen in that the spread of the PEF% for all but one patient is much smaller and tighter (gray) compared to the much larger range (wider bars) for % stenosis (black)
FIGURE 3The variability of the estimated percent obstruction (% stenosis) and peak expiratory flow percentage (PEF%) of Cotton‐Myer grade III patients. The superior reliability of PEF% is seen in that the spread of the PEF% for all but 3 patients is much smaller and tighter (gray) compared to the much larger range (wider bars) for % stenosis (black)