Physiological tests of small airways function in diagnosing asthma: a systematic review

Abstract

BackgroundAsthma is a common, heterogeneous disease that is characterised by chronic airway inflammation and variable expiratory airflow limitation. Current guidelines use spirometric measures for asthma assessment. This systematic review aimed to assess whether the most commonly reported tests of small airways function could contribute to the diagnosis of asthma.MethodsStandard systematic review methodology was used, and a range of electronic databases was searched (Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Web of Science, DARE). Studies that included physiological tests of small airways function to diagnose asthma in adults were included, with no restrictions on language or date. The risk of bias and quality assessment tools used were Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality tool for cross-sectional studies and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 for diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies.Results7072 studies were identified and 10 studies met review criteria. 7 included oscillation techniques and 5 included maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF). Studies were small and of variable quality. In oscillometry, total resistance (R5) and reactance at 5 Hz (X5) was altered in asthma compared with healthy controls. The percentage predicted of MMEF was lower in patients with asthma compared with controls in all studies and lower than the % predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s. In DTA of oscillometry, R5 showed a sensitivity between 69% and 72% and specificity between 61% and 86%.ConclusionThere were differences in the results of physiological tests of small airway function in patients with asthma compared with controls. However, studies are small and heterogeneous. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of these tests on a larger scale, including studies to determine which test methodology is the most useful in asthma.

Small Airways Response to Bronchodilators in Adults with Asthma or COPD: A Systematic Review

“…Nonetheless, in asthmatic patients with normal FEV 1 , MMEF has been reported below normal values, indicating small airways dysfunction as part of the disease paradigm. 22 The usefulness of BDR in managing COPD patients is also unclear. Even in the absence of FEV 1 improvement, Vital Capacity and Inspiratory Capacity can increase following inhaled bronchodilator use and these improvements are reflected in reduced dyspnea and increased exercise performance.…”

Pretreatment Alveolar Nitric Oxide Levels Predict Improvement of Pulmonary Function 1 Year Following Anti-Asthma Treatments in Patients with Inhaled Corticosteroid-Naïve Asthma

“…Instead, there are some clinical research works on these differences. Kobayashi et al [31] compared CANO (2CM) and CANO (TMAD) in patients with untreated asthma and showed that maximal mid-expiratory flow, which may be related to airway obstruction in peripheral airways [32], was correlated with both CANO (2CM) and CANO (TMAD) ; however, FEV 1 /FVC and sputum eosinophils were correlated with CANO (2CM) , but not with CANO (TMAD) [31]. Similarly, Sato et al [33] reported that CANO (2CM) , but not CANO (TMAD) , was negatively correlated with % predicted FEV 1 in patients with steroid-naïve asthma.…”

The diagnosis of asthma. Can physiological tests of small airways function help?

“…The MMEF has been used to help exclude cough variant asthma from chronic cough of other causes 62 and has been found to be abnormal in patients with mild asthma and bronchodilator reversibility. 39 Compared to the FEV 1 , the percentage predicted of MMEF has consistently been lower in multiple groups with asthma, despite a normal or near-normal percentage predicted FEV 1 63 . Nevertheless, high variability and poor reproducibly are the major drawbacks of using MMEF in diagnosis.…”