Bronchodilator Response in FVC Is Larger and More Relevant Than in FEV(1) in Severe Airflow Obstruction.

Recommendations on interpreting tests of bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) are conflicting. We investigated the dependence of BDR criteria on sex, age, height, ethnicity, and severity of respiratory impairment. BDR test data were available from clinical patients in the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United States (n = 15,278; female subjects, 51.7%) and from surveys in Canada, Norway, and five Latin-American countries (n = 16,250; female subjects, 54.7%). BDR calculated according to FEV1, FVC, and FEV1/FVC was expressed as absolute change, a percentage of the baseline level (% baseline), a percentage of the predicted value (% predicted), and z score. Change (Δ) in FEV1 and FVC, in milliliters, was unrelated to the baseline value but was biased toward age, height, sex, and level of airways obstruction; ΔFEV1 was significantly lower in African Americans. In 1,106 subjects with low FEV1 (200-1,621 mL) the FEV1 increased by 12% to 44.7% relative to baseline but < 200 mL. Expressing BDR as a percentage of the predicted value or as a z score attenuated the bias and made the 200-mL criterion redundant, but reduced positive responses by half. ΔFEV1 % baseline increased with the level of airflow obstruction but decreased with severe obstruction when expressed as z scores or % predicted; ΔFVC, however expressed, increased with the level of airflow obstruction. Expressing FEV1 responsiveness as % baseline spuriously suggests that responsiveness increases with the severity of respiratory impairment. Expressing change in FEV1 or FVC as % predicted or as z scores eliminates this artifact and renders the required 200-mL minimum increase redundant. In severe airways obstruction ΔFVC should be critically evaluated as an index of clinically important relief of hyperinflation, with implications for bronchodilator drug trials.

Quanjer PH ，Ruppel GL ，Langhammer A ，Krishna A ，Mertens F ，Johannessen A ，Menezes AMB ，Wehrmeister FC ，Perez-Padilla R ，Swanney MP ，Tan WC ，Bourbeau J ... -  《-》

Combined Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 Second and Forced Vital Capacity Bronchodilator Response, Exacerbations, and Mortality in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Fortis S ，Comellas A ，Make BJ ，Hersh CP ，Bodduluri S ，Georgopoulos D ，Kim V ，Criner GJ ，Dransfield MT ，Bhatt SP ，COPDGene Investigators–Core Units: <italic>Administrative Center</italic>, COPDGene Investigators–Clinical Centers: <italic>Ann Arbor VA</italic> ... -  《-》

A New Bronchodilator Response Grading Strategy Identifies Distinct Patient Populations.

Hansen JE ，Dilektasli AG ，Porszasz J ，Stringer WW ，Pak Y ，Rossiter HB ，Casaburi R ... -  《-》

Substantial variation exists in spirometry interpretation practices for airflow obstruction in accredited lung function laboratories across Australia and New Zealand.

Spirometry forms the foundation investigation for the diagnosis and monitoring of common pulmonary conditions. However, potential variation in spirometry interpretation for airflow obstruction may impact subsequent clinical management. To audit spirometry interpretation practices for airflow obstruction in Thoracic Society of Australia and New Zealand accredited laboratories. Thirty-nine accredited complex lung function laboratories were invited to participate in an online survey. The survey enquired about demographics, definition of lower limit of normal range for spirometry parameters, spirometric parameters used for identifying airflow obstruction, spirometric definition of airflow obstruction, definition of significant bronchodilator response and chosen spirometry reference equations. Thirty-six laboratories provided complete responses (response rate, 92%). To define the lower limit of normal, 26 of 36 used the 5th percentile, 7 of 36 used a fixed cut-off and 3 used other. Twenty-nine laboratories utilised forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity (FEV1 /FVC) as the sole parameter to identify airflow obstruction, 3 of 36 used FEV1 /FVC and FEF25-75% , and 4 used other. To define airflow obstruction, 25 of 36 laboratories used FEV1 /FVC < 5th percentile, 9 of 36 used a fixed cut-off (FEV1 /FVC < 0.7, 6/36; FEV1 /FVC < 0.8, 2/36; FEV1 /FVC < 0.75, 1/36) and 2 of 36 used other. Twenty-six laboratories defined a significant bronchodilator response as an increase of at least 200 mL and 12% in FEV1 and/or FVC, 9 of 36 used ≥200 mL and ≥ 12% increase in FEV1 only, and 1 used other criteria. Reference equations utilised for interpretation of spirometry data included: Quanjer 2012 Global Lung Initiative (16/36), the third National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey (8/36), European Community of Coal and Steel (8/36) and other (4/36). Significant heterogeneity in spirometry interpretation for airflow obstruction exists across Australian and New Zealand accredited lung function laboratories. Lack of standardisation may translate into clinically appreciable differences for the diagnosis and management of common respiratory conditions. Ongoing discussion regarding formal standardisation is required.

Holt NR ，Thompson BR ，Miller B ，Borg BM ... -  《-》

Bronchodilator Responsiveness Defined by the 2005 and 2021 ERS/ATS Criteria in Patients with Asthma as Well as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

In the 2021 ERS/ATS interpretive strategies for routine lung function tests, a positive bronchodilator response (BDR) was updated as a change of >10% relative to the predicted value in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) or forced vital capacity (FVC). We aimed to explore the differences between the 2005 and 2021 ERS/ATS criteria applied to patients with asthma as well as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). BDR test data about asthma patients aged 6-80 years and COPD patients aged 18-80 years were derived from the National Respiratory Medicine Center, First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, from January 2017 to March 2022. BDR results defined by the 2005 and 2021 ERS/ATS criteria were named 2005-BDR and 2021-BDR, respectively. We compared differences between 2005-BDR and 2021-BDR and analyzed the trend in the proportion of positive BDR (BDR+) with the level of airflow obstruction. A total of 4457 patients with asthma and 7764 patients with COPD were included in the analysis. The percentages of 2005-BDR+ and 2021-BDR+ were 63.32% and 52.84% for asthma, 30.92% and 22.94% for COPD, respectively. Of patients with 2005-BDR+, 81.86% for asthma and 70.18% for COPD showed 2021-BDR+ results, and these patients had higher FEV1%pred, FVC%pred (all P<0.05). Whichever BDR criterion was adopted, the proportion of BDR+ had an upward linear trend with the increased degree of airflow obstruction in COPD, but exhibited an approximate inverted U-shaped curve in asthma. In COPD, the proportion of BDRFEV1 was negatively associated with the degree of airflow obstruction, while BDRFVC was positively associated (all P<0.05). Compared with 2005-BDR+, the proportion of 2021-BDR+ reduced markedly in patients with asthma and COPD, but their trends with the degree of airflow obstruction did not change. Patients with consistent BDR+ had higher initial FEV1%pred and FVC%pred.

Li Y ，Lin J ，Wang Z ，Wang Z ，Tan L ，Liu S ，Huang J ，Gao Y ，Zheng J ... -  《International Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease》