Cargando…

The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) using FEV(1) is often utilised to separate COPD patients from asthmatics, although it can be present in some COPD patients. With the advent of treatments with distal airway deposition, BDR in the small airways (SA) may be of value in the management of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alobaidi, Nowaf Y., Almeshari, Mohammed A., Stockley, James A., Stockley, Robert A., Sapey, Elizabeth
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9801537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36585669
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-022-02235-0
_version_ 1784861513422471168
author Alobaidi, Nowaf Y.
Almeshari, Mohammed A.
Stockley, James A.
Stockley, Robert A.
Sapey, Elizabeth
author_facet Alobaidi, Nowaf Y.
Almeshari, Mohammed A.
Stockley, James A.
Stockley, Robert A.
Sapey, Elizabeth
author_sort Alobaidi, Nowaf Y.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) using FEV(1) is often utilised to separate COPD patients from asthmatics, although it can be present in some COPD patients. With the advent of treatments with distal airway deposition, BDR in the small airways (SA) may be of value in the management of COPD. We aimed to identify the prevalence of BDR in the SA, utilizing maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF) as a measure of SA. We further evaluated the prevalence of BDR in MMEF with and without BDR in FEV(1) and its association with baseline demographics, including conventional airflow obstruction severity and smoking history. METHODS: Lung function data of ever-smoking COPD patients were retrospectively analysed. BDR was evaluated 20 min after administering 2.5 mg of salbutamol via jet nebulizer. Increase in percent change of ≥ 12% and absolute change of ≥ 200 ml was used to define a BDR in FEV(1), whereas an increase percent change of MMEF ≥ 30% was used to define a BDR in MMEF. Patients were classified as one of three groups according to BDR levels: group 1 (BDR in MMEF and FEV(1)), group 2 (BDR in MMEF alone) and group 3 (no BDR in either measure). RESULT: BDR in MMEF was present in 59.2% of the patients. Of note, BDR in MMEF was present in all patients with BDR in FEV(1) (group 1) but also in 37.9% of the patients without BDR in FEV(1) (group 2). Patients in group 1 were younger than in groups 2 and 3. BMI was higher in group 1 than in group 3. Baseline FEV(1)% predicted and FVC % predicted were also higher in groups 1 and 2 than in group 3. CONCLUSION: BDR in the SA (evaluated by MMEF) is common in COPD, and it is also feature seen in all patients with BDR in FEV(1). Even in the absence of BDR in FEV(1), BDR in MMEF is detected in some patients with COPD, potentially identifying a subgroup of patients who may benefit from different treatment strategies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-022-02235-0.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9801537
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98015372022-12-31 The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study Alobaidi, Nowaf Y. Almeshari, Mohammed A. Stockley, James A. Stockley, Robert A. Sapey, Elizabeth BMC Pulm Med Research BACKGROUND: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) using FEV(1) is often utilised to separate COPD patients from asthmatics, although it can be present in some COPD patients. With the advent of treatments with distal airway deposition, BDR in the small airways (SA) may be of value in the management of COPD. We aimed to identify the prevalence of BDR in the SA, utilizing maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF) as a measure of SA. We further evaluated the prevalence of BDR in MMEF with and without BDR in FEV(1) and its association with baseline demographics, including conventional airflow obstruction severity and smoking history. METHODS: Lung function data of ever-smoking COPD patients were retrospectively analysed. BDR was evaluated 20 min after administering 2.5 mg of salbutamol via jet nebulizer. Increase in percent change of ≥ 12% and absolute change of ≥ 200 ml was used to define a BDR in FEV(1), whereas an increase percent change of MMEF ≥ 30% was used to define a BDR in MMEF. Patients were classified as one of three groups according to BDR levels: group 1 (BDR in MMEF and FEV(1)), group 2 (BDR in MMEF alone) and group 3 (no BDR in either measure). RESULT: BDR in MMEF was present in 59.2% of the patients. Of note, BDR in MMEF was present in all patients with BDR in FEV(1) (group 1) but also in 37.9% of the patients without BDR in FEV(1) (group 2). Patients in group 1 were younger than in groups 2 and 3. BMI was higher in group 1 than in group 3. Baseline FEV(1)% predicted and FVC % predicted were also higher in groups 1 and 2 than in group 3. CONCLUSION: BDR in the SA (evaluated by MMEF) is common in COPD, and it is also feature seen in all patients with BDR in FEV(1). Even in the absence of BDR in FEV(1), BDR in MMEF is detected in some patients with COPD, potentially identifying a subgroup of patients who may benefit from different treatment strategies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12890-022-02235-0. BioMed Central 2022-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9801537/ /pubmed/36585669 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-022-02235-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Alobaidi, Nowaf Y.
Almeshari, Mohammed A.
Stockley, James A.
Stockley, Robert A.
Sapey, Elizabeth
The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study
title The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study
title_full The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study
title_fullStr The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study
title_short The prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in COPD - a retrospective study
title_sort prevalence of bronchodilator responsiveness of the small airway (using mid-maximal expiratory flow) in copd - a retrospective study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9801537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36585669
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12890-022-02235-0
work_keys_str_mv AT alobaidinowafy theprevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT almesharimohammeda theprevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT stockleyjamesa theprevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT stockleyroberta theprevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT sapeyelizabeth theprevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT alobaidinowafy prevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT almesharimohammeda prevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT stockleyjamesa prevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT stockleyroberta prevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy
AT sapeyelizabeth prevalenceofbronchodilatorresponsivenessofthesmallairwayusingmidmaximalexpiratoryflowincopdaretrospectivestudy