Monitoring small airway dysfunction in connective tissue disease-related interstitial lung disease: a retrospective and prospective study

Small airway dysfunction (SAD), a hallmark of early lung function abnormality, is a major component of several chronic respiratory disorders. The role of SAD in patients with connective tissue disease-related interstitial lung disease (CTD-ILD) has not been explored. We conducted a two-parts (retros...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC pulmonary medicine 2023-03, Vol.23 (1), p.90-90, Article 90
Hauptverfasser: Xu, Linrui, Sgalla, Giacomo, Wang, Faping, Zhu, Min, Li, Liangyuan, Li, Ping, Xie, Qibing, Lv, Xiaoyan, Yu, Jianqun, Wang, Gang, Wan, Huajing, Richeldi, Luca, Luo, Fengming
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Small airway dysfunction (SAD), a hallmark of early lung function abnormality, is a major component of several chronic respiratory disorders. The role of SAD in patients with connective tissue disease-related interstitial lung disease (CTD-ILD) has not been explored. We conducted a two-parts (retrospective and prospective) study to collect pulmonary function tests from CTD-ILD patients. SAD was defined as at least two of the three measures (MMEF, FEF 50%, and FEF 75%) must be 65% of predicted values. Spearman correlation coefficient was used to evaluate association between SAD and other pulmonary function parameters. Mixed effects regression modeling analysis was used to assess response to treatment. CTD-ILD patients with SAD and without SAD were compared in this study. In the retrospective study, pulmonary function tests (PFTs) from 491 CTD-ILD patients were evaluated, SAD were identified in 233 (47.5%). CTD-ILD patients with SAD were less smokers (17.6% vs. 27.9%, p = 0.007) and more females (74.3% vs. 64.0%, p = 0.015) than those without SAD. CTD-ILD patients with SAD had lower vital capacity (% predicted FVC, 70.4 ± 18.3 vs. 80.0 ± 20.9, p 
ISSN:1471-2466
1471-2466
DOI:10.1186/s12890-023-02381-z