Measures of bronchodilator response of FEV1, FVC and SVC in a Swedish general population sample aged 50–64 years, the SCAPIS Pilot Study
Received 10 November 2016
Accepted for publication 6 January 2017
Published 22 March 2017 Volume 2017:12 Pages 973—980
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single-blind
Peer reviewers approved by Dr Charles Downs
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Richard Russell
K Torén,1 B Bake,1 A-C Olin,1 G Engström,2 A Blomberg,3 J Vikgren,4 J Hedner,5 J Brandberg,4 HL Persson,6,7 CM Sköld,8 A Rosengren,9 G Bergström,9 C Janson10
1Section of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, 2Department of Clinical Science, Lund University, Malmö, 3Division of Medicine/Respiratory Medicine, Department of Public Health and Clinical Medicine, Umeå University, Umeå, 4Department of Radiology, Institute of Clinical Sciences, 5Department of Internal Medicine/Lung Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, 6Department of Respiratory Medicine, 7Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, 8Respiratory Medicine Unit, Department of Medicine Solna, Centre for Molecular Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, 9Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Institute of Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, 10Department of Medical Sciences, Clinical Physiology and Lung, Allergy and Sleep Research, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
Background: Data are lacking from general population studies on how to define changes in lung function after bronchodilation. This study aimed to analyze different measures of bronchodilator response of forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and slow vital capacity (SVC).
Materials and methods: Data were derived from the Swedish Cardiopulmonary Bioimage Study (SCAPIS) Pilot study. This analysis comprised 1,050 participants aged 50–64 years from the general population. Participants were investigated using a questionnaire, and FEV1, FVC and SVC were recorded before and 15 minutes after inhalation of 400 µg of salbutamol. A bronchodilator response was defined as the relative change from baseline value expressed as the difference in units of percent predicted normal. Predictors of bronchodilator responses were assessed using multiple linear regression models. Airway obstruction was defined as FEV1/FVC ratio below lower limit of normal (LLN) before bronchodilation, and COPD was defined as an FEV1/FVC ratio below LLN after bronchodilation. Physician-diagnosed asthma was defined as an affirmative answer to “Have you ever had asthma diagnosed by a physician?”. Asymptomatic never-smokers were defined as those not reporting physician-diagnosed asthma, physician-diagnosed COPD or emphysema, current wheeze or chronic bronchitis and being a lifelong never-smoker.
Results: Among all subjects, the greatest bronchodilator responses (FEV1, FVC and SVC) were found in subjects with asthma or COPD. The upper 95th percentile of bronchodilator responses in asymptomatic never-smokers was 8.7% for FEV1, 4.2% for FVC and 5.0% for SVC. The bronchodilator responses were similar between men and women. In a multiple linear regression model comprising all asymptomatic never-smokers, the bronchodilator response of FEV1 was significantly associated with airway obstruction and height.
Conclusion: When the bronchodilator response in asymptomatic never-smokers is reported as the difference in units of predicted normal, significant reversibility of FEV1, FVC and SVC to bronchodilators is ~9%, 4% and 5%, respectively.
Keywords: spirometry, reversibility, COPD, epidemiology
A Letter to the Editor has been received and published for this article
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]
Other articles by this author:
Occupational exposure to vapor, gas, dust, or fumes and chronic airflow limitation, COPD, and emphysema: the Swedish CArdioPulmonary BioImage Study (SCAPIS pilot)
TorÃ©n K, Vikgren J, Olin A, Rosengren A, BergstrÃ¶m G, Brandberg J
Published Date: 29 November 2017
Validity of physician-diagnosed COPD in relation to spirometric definitions of COPD in a general population aged 50–64 years – the SCAPIS pilot study
TorÃ©n K, Murgia N, Olin AC, Hedner J, Brandberg J, Rosengren A, BergstrÃ¶m G
Published Date: 4 August 2017
TorÃ©n K, Olin AC, Lindberg A, Vikgren J, SchiÃ¶ler L, Brandberg J, Johnsson Ã , EngstrÃ¶m G, Persson HL, SkÃ¶ld M, Hedner J, Lindberg E, Malinovschi A, Piitulainen E, Wollmer P, Rosengren A, Janson C, Blomberg A, BergstrÃ¶m G
Published Date: 2 May 2016