Chest
Volume 78, Issue 4, October 1980, Pages 595-600
Journal home page for Chest

Clinical Investigations
Volume Adjustment of Maximal Midexpiratory Flow: Importance of Changes in Total Lung Capacity

https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.78.4.595Get rights and content

In 21 of 100 consecutive subjects demonstrating ≥ 10 percent Increase In one second forced expired volume following 200 µg inhaled salbutamol, the forced expired flow over the middle half of the vital capacity (FEF25–75%) was unchanged (n = 16) or fell ≥ 10 percent (n = 5). Volume adjustment of FEF25–75%, to the same volume below total lung capacity (TLC) before and after administration of the bronchodilator resulted in significant increases in 18 of these 21 subjects. The volume-adjusted FEF25–75% increased more (98 percent) following 1500 µg inhaled metaproterenol in ten asthmatic subjects, and decreased more (53 percent) following inhalation of histamine in eight subjects, than did the standard FEF25–75% (44 percent increase and 34 percent decrease respectively). When the small changes in TLC which were seen following metaproterenol (4.4 ± 4.1 percent reduction, p < 0.01) and histamine (11.0 ± 7.2 percent increase, p < 0.001) were considered, and FEF25–75% volume adjusted so it was measured at the same absolute lung volume, greater changes were seen (198 percent increase after use of metaproterenol, and 75 percent decrease after use of histamine). When FEF25–75% is being examined following administration of a bronchodilator or a bronchoprovocation challenge, it should be volume-adjusted to absolute lung volume. When TLC cannot easily be determined repeatedly (eg routine pulmonary function studies), volume adjustment to the same volume below TLC is advised.

Section snippets

Study 1

Consecutive routine pulmonary function studies were reviewed until 100 studies were found in which the FEV1 improved by 10 percent or more following inhalation of 200 µg of salbutamol. The FEF25–75% following inhaled salbutamol was then reviewed for these 100 pulmonary function tests, and was recorded as improved (≥ 10 percent increase), unchanged (< 10 percent change), or reduced (≥ 10 percent decrease). In studies where the FEF25–75% improved less than 10 percent following inhalation of

Study 1

From 330 consecutive routine pulmonary function studies, 100 studies were found in which the FEV1 improved ≥ 10 percent after therapy with 200 μg salbutamol. In these 100 studies, the FEF25–75% improved ≥ 10 percent in 79, was unchanged (< 10 percent) in 16, and decreased by ≥ 10 percent in five. In the 21 studies where the FEF25–75% failed to show improvement, volume adjustment by method 1 resulted in ≥ 10 percent improvement in 18; the mean improvement in volume-adjusted FEF25–75% in these 21

Discussion

This investigation has confirmed and expanded on the value of volume-adjustment of the FEF25–75%, not only for the demonstration of bronchodilatation on routine pulmonary function studies and in bronchodilator research, but also in bronchoprovocation studies. Furthermore, small changes in TLC, when taken into account, can result in large changes in the volume-adjusted FEF25–75% and should be considered when volume-adjusting FEF25–75%.

In routine pulmonary function tests, we have identified a 21

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We wish to thank Mrs. R. Day and Mr. A. Campbell for help in preparing the manuscript, and Mrs. B. P. C. Gore for technical assistance.

References (24)

  • CR Olsen et al.

    A method for interpreting acute response to bronchodilators from the spirogram

    Am Rev Respir Dis

    (1967)
  • DW Cockcroft et al.

    Bronchial reactivity to inhaled histamine: A method and clinical survey

    Clin Allergy

    (1977)
  • Cited by (24)

    • Development, Structure, and Physiology in Normal Lung and in Asthma

      2014, Middleton's Allergy: Principles and Practice: Eighth Edition
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Pulmonary Service, Department of Medicine, University Hospital, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

    Supported in part by a grant from the Medical Research Council of Canada.

    Manuscript received September 29; revision accepted November 12.

    View full text