Article

Adult-type pulmonary function tests in infants without respiratory disease.

Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43205, USA.
Pediatric Pulmonology (Impact Factor: 2.38). 09/2000; 30(3):215-27. DOI: 10.1002/1099-0496(200009)30:33.0.CO;2-V
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A new method that permits the measurement of adult-type maximal expiratory flow-volume curves and fractional lung volumes in sedated infants was recently described. The purpose of this study was to define the normal range for these new measures of pulmonary function in infants and young children. Measurements of forced expiratory flows and fractional lung volume were made on 35 occasions in 22 children (ages 3-120 weeks) without respiratory disease. Maximal expiratory flow-volume curves were measured by the raised lung volume, thoracoabdominal compression technique. Functional residual capacity (FRC) was measured plethysmographically. Measurements of total lung capacity (TLC), residual volume (RV), FRC, forced vital capacity (FVC), and forced expiratory flows at 25, 50, 75, 85, and between 25% and 75% of expired FVC (FEF(25), FEF(50), FEF(75), FEF(85), and FEF(25-75), respectively) all increased in relation to infant length (P<0.001). RV/TLC, FRC/TLC, and FEF(25-75)/FVC declined in relation to increasing length (P<0.001). The forced expiratory flow and fractional lung volume measurements using this method were similar to previously reported estimates using other methods. These estimates represent a reasonable reference standard for infants and young children with respiratory problems.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
66 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives Infants with congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) have variable degrees of pulmonary hypoplasia at birth. Few reports of lung function over the first years of life exist in this group of children.HypothesisPulmonary function abnormalities correlate with severity of neonatal disease and intensity of neonatal therapies needed. We also hypothesized that longitudinal measurements of lung function over the usual period of rapid lung growth would lend some insight into how the lung remodels in CDH infants.MethodologyNinety-eight infants with CDH between 11 days and 44 months of age underwent pulmonary function testing (PFT) on 1–5 occasions using the raised volume rapid thoracic compression technique. Demographic data were also collected.Main ResultsForced expiratory flows were below normal. Total lung capacity was normal, but residual volume and functional residual capacity were elevated. Children requiring patch closure, ECMO, or pulmonary vasodilators generally had lower lung functions at follow up. Additionally, longer duration of mechanical ventilation correlated with worse lung function.Conclusions Lung functions of survivors of CDH remain abnormal throughout the first 3 years of life. The degree of pulmonary function impairment correlated both with markers of the initial degree of pulmonary hypoplasia and the duration of mechanical ventilation. Understanding the relationship between the phenotypic presentation of CDH and the potential for subsequent lung growth could help refine both pre- and postnatal therapies to optimize lung growth in CDH infants. Pediatr Pulmonol. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Pediatric Pulmonology 07/2014; · 2.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: For the last thirty years, oral chloral hydrate has been used for sedation of infants for lung function testing. Recently, however, availability of chloral hydrate became severely limited in the United States after two manufacturers discontinued manufacturing in 2012. Due to these limitations and the recent and ongoing shortage of chloral hydrate, other medications have been proposed for lung function testing, including midazolam and propofol. Herein, we describe our limited experience using intravenous dexmedetomedine (DMED), a medication thus far described as having minimal effect on pulmonary function or respiratory drive. Pediatr Pulmonol. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Pediatric Pulmonology 09/2014; · 2.38 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: There is growing recognition and understanding of the entities that cause interstitial lung disease (ILD) in infants. These entities are distinct from those that cause ILD in older children and adults. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel was convened to develop evidence-based guidelines on the classification, diagnosis, and management of ILD in children, focusing on neonates and infants under 2 years of age. Recommendations were formulated using a systematic approach. Outcomes considered important included the accuracy of the diagnostic evaluation, complications of delayed or incorrect diagnosis, psychosocial complications affecting the patient's or family's quality of life, and death. Results: No controlled clinical trials were identified. Therefore, observational evidence and clinical experience informed judgments. These guidelines: (1) describe the clinical characteristics of neonates and infants (<2 yr of age) with diffuse lung disease (DLD); (2) list the common causes of DLD that should be eliminated during the evaluation of neonates and infants with DLD; (3) recommend methods for further clinical investigation of the remaining infants, who are regarded as having "childhood ILD syndrome"; (4) describe a new pathologic classification scheme of DLD in infants; (5) outline supportive and continuing care; and (6) suggest areas for future research. Conclusions: After common causes of DLD are excluded, neonates and infants with childhood ILD syndrome should be evaluated by a knowledgeable subspecialist. The evaluation may include echocardiography, controlled ventilation high-resolution computed tomography, infant pulmonary function testing, bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage, genetic testing, and/or lung biopsy. Preventive care, family education, and support are essential.
    American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 08/2013; 188(3):376-94. · 11.04 Impact Factor