Assessment of Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) reference equations for diffusing capacity in relation to respiratory burden in the Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS)Show others and affiliations
2020 (English)In: European Respiratory Journal, ISSN 0903-1936, E-ISSN 1399-3003, Vol. 56, no 2, article id 1901995Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]
The Global Lung Function Initiative (GLI) has recently published international reference values for diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO). Lower limit of normal (LLN), i.e. the 5th percentile, usually defines impaired DLCO. We examined if the GLI LLN for DLCO differs from the LLN in a Swedish population of healthy, never-smoking individuals and how any such differences affect identification of subjects with respiratory burden.
Spirometry, DLCO, chest high-resolution computed tomography (HRCT) and questionnaires were obtained from the first 15 040 participants, aged 50–64 years, of the Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS). Both GLI reference values and the lambda-mu-sigma (LMS) method were used to define the LLN in asymptomatic never-smokers without respiratory disease (n=4903, of which 2329 were women).
Both the median and LLN for DLCO from SCAPIS were above the median and LLN from the GLI (p<0.05). The prevalence of DLCO <GLI LLN (and also <SCAPIS LLN) was 3.9%, while the prevalence of DLCO >GLI LLN but <SCAPIS LLN was 5.7%. Subjects with DLCO >GLI LLN but <SCAPIS LLN (n=860) had more emphysema (14.3% versus 4.5%, p<0.001), chronic airflow limitation (8.5% versus 3.9%, p<0.001) and chronic bronchitis (8.3% versus 4.4%, p<0.01) than subjects (n=13 600) with normal DLCO (>GLI LLN and >SCAPIS LLN). No differences were found with regard to physician-diagnosed asthma.
The GLI LLN for DLCO is lower than the estimated LLN in healthy, never-smoking, middle-aged Swedish adults. Individuals with DLCO above the GLI LLN but below the SCAPIS LLN had, to a larger extent, an increased respiratory burden. This suggests clinical implications for choosing an adequate LLN for studied populations.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Lausanne, Switzerland: EUROPEAN RESPIRATORY SOC JOURNALS LTD , 2020. Vol. 56, no 2, article id 1901995
National Category
Respiratory Medicine and Allergy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-170918DOI: 10.1183/13993003.01995-2019ISI: 000574951300002PubMedID: 32341107Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85089787374OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-170918DiVA, id: diva2:1485185
Note
Funding Agencies|Swedish Heart and Lung FoundationSwedish Heart-Lung Foundation; Knut and Alice Wallenberg FoundationKnut & Alice Wallenberg Foundation; Swedish Research CouncilSwedish Research Council; VINNOVA (Swedens Innovation Agency)Vinnova; University of Gothenburg; Sahlgrenska University Hospital; Karolinska InstitutetKarolinska Institutet; Karolinska University HospitalKarolinska Institutet; Linkoping University and University Hospital; Lund University; Skane University Hospital; Umea University and University Hospital; Uppsala University and University Hospital; Swedish government; Swedish county councils
2020-11-012020-11-012021-12-28Bibliographically approved