4.5 Article

The 15-Step Oximetry Test: a Reliable Tool to Identify Candidates for Lung Transplantation Among Patients With Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEART AND LUNG TRANSPLANTATION
卷 28, 期 4, 页码 328-333

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2008.12.019

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a relentlessly progressive disease with a median survival of approximately 3 years. Measurements of lung volumes and diffusion capacity at rest are generally used to monitor the clinical course of IPF. Due to its high mortality, identification of patients at high risk is crucial for treatment strategies such as lung transplantation. This study was design to determine whether the simple 15-step climbing exercise oximetry test accurately characterizes disease severity and survival in patients with IPF. Methods: The study population consisted of 51 patients with progressive IPF. Findings on the 15-step climbing test, pulmonary function tests, cardiopulmonary exercise test and 6-minute walk distance test were assessed at baseline. Participants were prospectively followed for >= 2 years to determine the relationship between the test parameters and survival. Results: On univariate analysis, there were strong correlations between the 15-stair climbing test parameters and survival. On stepwise linear regression analysis, independent significant predictors of mortality were lowest saturation levels on the 15-step test and the 6-minute walk distance test. Conclusions: The lowest saturation and desaturation areas on the 15-step oximetry test are significantly associated with long-term outcome in patients with IPF. We suggest that the 15-step test be used as a simple and reliable tool to predict severity and prognosis in IPF and to identify candidates for lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 2009;28:328-33. Copyright (C) 2009 by the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据