Cargando…

Oscillometry complements spirometry in evaluation of subjects following toxic inhalation

The World Trade Center (WTC) destruction released dust and fumes into the environment. Although many community members developed respiratory symptoms, screening spirometry was usually normal. We hypothesised that forced oscillation testing would identify functional abnormalities undetected by spirom...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Berger, Kenneth I., Turetz, Meredith, Liu, Mengling, Shao, Yongzhao, Kazeros, Angeliki, Parsia, Sam, Caplan-Shaw, Caralee, Friedman, Stephen M., Maslow, Carey B., Marmor, Michael, Goldring, Roberta M., Reibman, Joan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Respiratory Society 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5005120/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27730155
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00043-2015
Descripción
Sumario:The World Trade Center (WTC) destruction released dust and fumes into the environment. Although many community members developed respiratory symptoms, screening spirometry was usually normal. We hypothesised that forced oscillation testing would identify functional abnormalities undetected by spirometry and that symptom severity would relate to magnitude of abnormalities measured by oscillometry. A symptomatic cohort (n=848) from the Bellevue Hospital WTC Environmental Health Center was evaluated and compared to an asymptomatic cohort (n=475) from the New York City Department of Health WTC Health Registry. Spirometry and oscillometry were performed. Oscillometry measurements included resistance (R(5)) and frequency dependence of resistance (R(5−20)). Spirometry was normal for the majority of subjects (73.2% symptomatic versus 87.6% asymptomatic, p<0.0001). In subjects with normal spirometry, R(5) and R(5−20) were higher in symptomatic versus asymptomatic subjects (median (interquartile range) R(5) 0.436 (0.206) versus 0.314 (0.129) kPa·L(−1)·s(−1), p<0.001; R(5−20) 0.075 (0.085) versus 0.004 (0.042) kPa·L(−1)·s(−1), p<0.0001). In symptomatic subjects, R(5) and R(5−20) increased with increasing severity and frequency of wheeze (p<0.05). Measurement of R(5–20) correlated with the presence and severity of symptoms even when spirometry was within normal limits. These findings are in accord with small airway abnormalities as a potential explanation of the respiratory symptoms.