Exhaled Particles After a Standardized Breathing Maneuver.

BACKGROUND: Particles in exhaled air (PEx) provide samples of respiratory tract lining fluid from small airways and offer a new opportunity to monitor pathological changes. The exhaled particles are produced by reopening of closed small airways and contain surfactant. The amount of PEx varies by orders of magnitude among subjects. A standardized breathing pattern reduces the variation, but it remains large and the reasons are unknown. The aim of the present study was to assess to what extent sex, age, body size, and spirometry results explain the interindividual variation of PEx among healthy middle-aged subjects. METHODS: The PExA® instrument was used to measure PEx in 126 healthy middle-aged nonsmoking subjects participating in the European Respiratory Community Health Survey (ERCS-III). The subjects performed a standardized breathing maneuver involving expiration to residual volume, a breath-hold of 3 seconds, a full inspiration, and then a full expiration into the PExA instrument. PEx number concentrations were expressed per exhalation and per exhaled liter. Age and anthropometric and spirometric variables were analyzed as potential predictors. RESULTS: PEx/L was consistently and negatively associated to lung size-related variables and accordingly lower in men than in women. PEx/Exhalation was similar in women and men. Increasing age was associated with increasing PEx. Reference equations are presented based on age, weight, and spirometry variables and independent of sex. These predictors explained 28%-29% of the interindividual variation. CONCLUSIONS: The interindividual variation of PEx after a standardized breathing maneuver is large and the considered predictors explain a minor part only.

Validity of a questionnaire-based diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in a general population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is based on airflow obstruction. In epidemiological studies, spirometric data have often been lacking and researchers have had to rely almost solely on questionnaire answers. The aim of this study is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of questionnaire answers to detect COPD. METHODS: A sample of the Swedish general population without physician-diagnosed asthma was randomly selected and interviewed using a respiratory questionnaire. All eligible subjects aged 25-75 years (n = 3892) performed spirometry for detection of airflow obstruction using Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) or American Thoracic Society (ATS)/European Respiratory Society (ERS) criteria. Sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (LR+), positive predictive values (PPVs), and negative predictive values (NPVs) were calculated to define diagnostic accuracy of questionnaire answers. RESULTS: The sensitivity of the question "Have you been diagnosed by a physician as having COPD or emphysema?" in detecting airflow obstruction was 5.7% using GOLD, and 9.8% using ATS/ERS, criteria; specificity was 99.7% for GOLD and 99.5% for ATS/ERS. Sensitivity, specificity, and PPV were higher for the question compared to self-reported symptoms of chronic bronchitis in identifying subjects with airflow obstruction. CONCLUSIONS: The high specificity and good PPV suggest that the question "Have you been diagnosed by a physician as having COPD or emphysema?" is more likely to identify those who do not have airflow obstruction, whereas the low sensitivity of this question could underestimate the real burden of COPD in the general population.