4.5 Article

DIAPHRAGMATIC ULTRASOUND IN NON-CYSTIC FIBROSIS BRONCHIECTASIS: RELATIONSHIP TO CLINICAL PARAMETERS

Journal

ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY
Volume 47, Issue 4, Pages 902-909

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2020.12.009

Keywords

Bronchiectasis; Diaphragm thickness; Diaphragm mobility; Ultrasound

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In patients with non-CF bronchiectasis, diaphragm thickness is related to disease severity, pulmonary function, and physical activity, while diaphragm mobility is related to disease severity and pulmonary function.
aim of this study was to assess diaphragm thickness (DT) and mobility (DM) and to investigate their relationship to clinical parameters in patients with non-cystic fibrosis (non-CF) bronchiectasis. Thirty-eight patients with non-CF bronchiectasis were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. DT was measured using ultrasound at different lung volumes (at residual volume [DTRV], functional residual capacity [DTFRC] and total lung capacity [DTTLC]). DM was measured using ultrasound during quiet breathing (DMQB) and deep breathing (DMDB). Disease severity, pulmonary function, respiratory muscle strength, exercise capacity and physical activity were assessed. DTRV correlated with disease severity (r = 0.332, p = 0.042), FEV1% (r = 0.387, p = 0.016) and FVC% (r = 0.405, p = 0.012). DTFRC correlated with FVC% (r = 0.331, p = 0.042). DTTLC correlated with disease severity (r = 0.430, p = 0.007) and total physical activity time (r = 0.379, p = 0.019). DMDB correlated with disease severity (r = -0.380, p = 0.019), FEV1% (r = 0.369, p = 0.023) and FVC% (r = 0.405, p = 0.012). DT is related to disease severity, pulmonary function and physical activity, while DM is related to disease severity and pulmonary function in patients with non-CF bronchiectasis. (E-mail: tanrverdiaylin@gmail.com) ? 2020 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available