Comparison between global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease criterion and lower limit of normal criterion for the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Juan Carlos Rodríguez Vázquez; Dania González Herrera; Silvia Venero Fernández; Carlos Gassiot Nuño; Pedro Pablo Pino Alfonso

2015, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Rev cubana med 2015; 54 (3)

Comparison between 'global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease' criterion and 'lower limit of normal' criterion for the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Rodríguez VJC, González HD, Venero FS, Gassiot NC, Pino APP

Full text

How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page: 227-238
PDF size: 136.00 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: there is evidence of the limitations of the methods used to interpret pulmonary function such as obstructive.
Objective: compare the advantages and disadvantages of the method recommended by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) and the lower limit of normal (LLN).
Methods: an evaluation study of these biomedical technologies was conducted. 732 patients were included with clinical criteria of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) with dyspnea (group 1) and 2 control groups of 100 healthy individuals of 18-30 years (group 2) and another 100 healthy individuals aged 60 or more (group 3). All groups were applied both spirometric interpretation methods and the results compared.
Results: 26 patients (3.5 %) were negative according to GOLD criteria and 79 (10.8 %) according to LIN. The GOLD method reflected 4 % of cases with obstructive lung function in group 3 and LIN showed 25 % negative in group 2. When the two combined methods were applied to 100% of COPD patients were positive for clinic bronchial obstruction.
Conclusions: GOLD method is more accurate than LIN for the diagnosis of COPD. However, LIN is most effective in men older 60 years. By using both methods at a time, COPD diagnosis is achieved in 100 % of cases.

REFERENCES

Hansen JE, Sun XG, Wasserman K. Spirometric criteria for airway obstruction: use percentage of FEV1/FVC ratio below the fifth percentile, not< 70 %. Chest. 2007;131:349-55. PubMed PMID:17296632.
Izquierdo Alonso JL, Lucas Ramos P, Rodríguez González-Moro JM. El uso del límite inferior de la normalidad como criterio de EPOC excluye pacientes con elevada morbilidad y alto consumo de recursos sanitarios. Arch de Bronconeumol. [Internet]. 2012 [citado 21 jun 2014];48:223-8. Disponible en: http://www.archbronconeumol.org/es/el-uso-del-limite-inferior/articulo/90141597/
Mannino DM, Díaz Guzmán E. Interpreting lung function data using 80 % predicted and fixed thresholds identifies patients at increased risk of mortality. Chest. 2012;141:73-80.
Roche N, Dalmay F, Perez T, Kuntz C, Vergnenègre A, Neukirch F, et al. Impact of chronic airflow obstruction in a working population. Eur Respir J. 2008;31:1227- 33. PubMed PMID: 18216058.
Enright PL. GOLD stage I is not a COPD risk factor. Thorax. 2007;62:1107-9. PubMed PMID:18025146.
Pinto Plata VM, Celli Cruz RA, Vassaux C, Torre Bouscoulet L, Mendes A, Rassulo J. Differences in cardiopulmonary exercise test results by American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society Global initiative for chronic obstructive Lung Disease stage categories and gender. Chest. 2007;132:1204-11. PubMed PMID:17934113.
Pelegrino R, Viegi E, Brusasco R, Crapo F, Burgos R, Casaburi A, et al. Interpretative strategies for lung function tests. Eur Respir J. 2005;26:948-68.
Mannino DM, Buist AS, Volmer WM. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the older adult: what defines abnormal lung function? Thorax. 2007;62:237-41.
Vollmer WM, Gislason T, Burney P, Enright PL, Gulsvik A, Kocabas A, et al. Comparison of spirometry criteria for the diagnosis of COPD: results from the BOLD study. Eur Respir J. 2009;34:588-97. PubMed PMID 19460786.