Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Language
Year range
1.
J. bras. pneumol ; 46(1): e20180328, 2020. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1056628

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Objective: To evaluate the relationship that the difference between slow vital capacity (SVC) and FVC (ΔSVC-FVC) has with demographic, clinical, and pulmonary function data. Methods: This was an analytical cross-sectional study in which participants completed a respiratory health questionnaire, as well as undergoing spirometry and plethysmography. The sample was divided into two groups: ΔSVC-FVC ≥ 200 mL and ΔSVC-FVC < 200 mL. The intergroup correlations were analyzed, and binomial logistic regression analysis was performed. Results: The sample comprised 187 individuals. In the sample as a whole, the mean ΔSVC-FVC was 0.17 ± 0.14 L, and 61 individuals (32.62%) had a ΔSVC-FVC ≥ 200 mL. The use of an SVC maneuver reduced the prevalence of nonspecific lung disease and of normal spirometry results by revealing obstructive lung disease (OLD). In the final logistic regression model (adjusted for weight and body mass index > 30 kg/m2), OLD and findings of air trapping (high functional residual capacity and a low inspiratory capacity/TLC ratio) were predictors of a ΔSVC-FVC ≥ 200 mL. The chance of a bronchodilator response was found to be greater in the ΔSVC-FVC ≥ 200 mL group: for FEV1 (OR = 4.38; 95% CI: 1.45-13.26); and for FVC (OR = 3.83; 95% CI: 1.26-11.71). Conclusions: The use of an SVC maneuver appears to decrease the prevalence of nonspecific lung disease and of normal spirometry results. Individuals with a ΔSVC-FVC ≥ 200 mL, which is probably the result of OLD and air trapping, are apparently more likely to respond to bronchodilator administration.


RESUMO Objetivo: Avaliar a relação da diferença entre a capacidade vital lenta (CVL) e CVF (ΔCVL-CVF) com dados demográficos, clínicos e de função pulmonar. Métodos: Estudo analítico, transversal, no qual os participantes responderam a um questionário de saúde respiratória e foram submetidos a espirometria e pletismografia. A amostra foi dividida em dois grupos: ΔCVL-CVF ≥ 200 mL e ΔCVL-CVF < 200 mL. Foram realizadas análises de correlações entre os grupos e de regressão logística binominal. Resultados: Foram selecionados 187 indivíduos. Na amostra total, a média da ΔCVL-CVF foi de 0,17 ± 0,14 L. Na amostra, 61 indivíduos (32,62%) apresentaram ΔCVL-CVF ≥ 200 mL. O uso da manobra expiratória lenta reduziu a prevalência de distúrbio ventilatório inespecífico e resultados espirométricos normais, ao revelar distúrbio ventilatório obstrutivo (DVO). DVO e achados de aprisionamento aéreo (capacidade residual funcional elevada e capacidade inspiratória/CPT reduzida) foram preditores de ΔCVL-CVF ≥ 200 mL no modelo final da regressão logística (ajustada para peso e índice de massa corpórea > 30 kg/m2). Foi observada maior chance de resposta ao broncodilatador no grupo ΔCVL-CVF ≥ 200 mL: VEF1 (OR = 4,38; IC95%: 1,45-13,26) e CVF (OR = 3,83; IC95%: 1,26-11,71). Conclusões: O uso da manobra expiratória lenta diminuiu a prevalência de distúrbio ventilatório inespecífico e de resultados espirométricos normais, podendo a ΔCVL-CVF ≥ 200 mL ser resultado de DVO e aprisionamento aéreo, tendo maior chance de resposta ao broncodilatador.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Vital Capacity/physiology , Forced Expiratory Volume/physiology , Lung Diseases, Obstructive/physiopathology , Plethysmography , Respiratory Function Tests , Spirometry , Cross-Sectional Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Statistics, Nonparametric
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL