4.3 Article

Correlation between lung function tests and peak oxygen consumption in post-TB lung disease

出版社

INT UNION AGAINST TUBERCULOSIS LUNG DISEASE (I U A T L D)
DOI: 10.5588/ijtld.21.0504

关键词

tuberculosis; spirometry; exercise capacity; cardiopulmonary exercise testing; VO2 peak

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found weak correlations between lung function testing and exercise capacity in patients with post-TB lung disease (PTLD), with only forced vital capacity (FVC) showing a higher correlation with peak oxygen consumption (VO(2)peak).
BACKGROUND: After TB treatment, many patients have post-TB lung disease (PTLD), associated with increased mortality and morbidity. Nevertheless, relationships between lung function testing and exercise capacity in people with PTLD are poorly understood. METHODS: This single-centre study investigated the association between lung function testing and peak oxygen consumption (VO(2)peak) and percentage-predicted VO(2)peak (VO(2)peak (%pred)) in adults with PTLD investigated for surgery. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients (52 males, 30 females) with a mean age of 43.2 years (SD 11.3) were included. Spirometric values of forced vital capacity (FVC) percentage predicted (%pred) and forced expiratory volume in 1 sec (FEV1) %pred suggested significant correlations with VO(2)peak (%pred) (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001), whereas FEV1/FVC did not. Diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) %pred also correlated significantly with VO(2)peak (%pred) (P = 0.002). However, the magnitude of all significant correlation coefficients were weak. No significant correlations for any plethysmographic values with VO(2)peak (%pred) could be robustly concluded. Correlations with VO(2)peak (ml/kg/min) for most physiological variables were less robust than for VO(2)peak (%pred). CONCLUSIONS: Although statistically significant, the correlations between any measure of lung function and VO(2)peak or VO(2)peak (%pred) were weak, with only FVC correlation coefficient surpassing 0.50.

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

4.3
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