Search

Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) in obstructive lung disease varies over time and may be associated with distinct clinical features.Is consistent BDR over time (always present) differentially associated with obstructive lung disease features relative to inconsistent (sometimes present) or never (never present) BDR in tobacco-exposed people with or without COPD?We retrospectively analyzed data from 2,269 tobacco-exposed participants in the Subpopulations and Intermediate Outcome Measures in COPD Study with or without COPD. We used various BDR definitions: change of ≥ 200 mL and ≥ 12% in FEVBoth consistent and inconsistent ATS-BDR were associated with asthma history and greater small airways disease (%parametric response mapping functional small airways disease) relative to never ATS-BDR in participants with GOLD stage 0 disease and the entire cohort. We observed similar findings using FEVDemonstration of BDR, even once, describes an obstructive lung disease phenotype with a history of asthma and greater small airways disease. Consistent demonstration of BDR indicated a high risk of lung function decline over time in the entire cohort and was associated with higher risk of progression to COPD in patients with GOLD stage 0 disease.

Background: Emergent endotracheal intubations (ETI) in pulmonary hypertension (PH) patients are associated with increased mortality. Post-intubation interventions that could increase survivability in this population have not been explored. We evaluate early clinical characteristics and complications following emergent endotracheal intubation and seek predictors of adverse outcomes during this post-intubation period. Methods: Retrospective cohort analysis of adult patients with groups 1 and 3 PH who underwent emergent intubation between 2005-2021 in medical and liver transplant ICUs at a tertiary medical center. PH patients were compared to non-PH patients, matched by Charlson Comorbidity Index. Primary outcomes were 24-h post-intubation and inpatient mortalities. Various 24-h post-intubation secondary outcomes were compared between PH and control cohorts. Results: We identified 48 PH and 110 non-PH patients. Pulmonary hypertension was not associated with increased 24-h mortality (OR 1.32, 95%CI 0.35-4.94, P = .18), but was associated with inpatient mortality (OR 4.03, 95%CI 1.29-12.5, P = .016) after intubation. Within 24 h post-intubation, PH patients experienced more frequent acute kidney injury (43.5% vs. 19.8%, P = .006) and required higher norepinephrine dosing equivalents (6.90 [0.13-10.6] mcg/kg/min, vs. 0.20 [0.10-2.03] mcg/kg/min, P = .037). Additionally, the median P/F ratio (PaO2/FiO2) was lower in PH patients (96.3 [58.9-201] vs. 233 [146-346] in non-PH, P = .001). Finally, a post-intubation increase in PaCO2 was associated with mortality in the PH cohort (post-intubation change in PaCO2 +5.14 ± 16.1 in non-survivors vs. −18.7 ± 28.0 in survivors, P = .007). Conclusions: Pulmonary hypertension was associated with worse outcomes after emergent endotracheal intubation than similar patients without PH. More importantly, our data suggest that the first 24 hours following intubation in the PH group represent a particularly vulnerable period that may determine long-term outcomes. Early post-intubation interventions may be key to improving survival in this population.

BACKGROUND: Many persons with a history of smoking tobacco have clinically significant respiratory symptoms despite an absence of airflow obstruction as assessed by spirometry. They are often treated with medications for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but supporting evidence for this treatment is lacking. METHODS: We randomly assigned persons who had a tobacco-smoking history of at least 10 pack-years, respiratory symptoms as defined by a COPD Assessment Test score of at least 10 (scores range from 0 to 40, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms), and preserved lung function on spirometry (ratio of forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV(1)] to forced vital capacity [FVC] ≥0.70 and FVC ≥70% of the predicted value after bronchodilator use) to receive either indacaterol (27.5 μg) plus glycopyrrolate (15.6 μg) or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was at least a 4-point decrease (i.e., improvement) in the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating worse health status) after 12 weeks without treatment failure (defined as an increase in lower respiratory symptoms treated with a long-acting inhaled bronchodilator, glucocorticoid, or antibiotic agent). RESULTS: A total of 535 participants underwent randomization. In the modified intention-to-treat population (471 participants), 128 of 227 participants (56.4%) in the treatment group and 144 of 244 (59.0%) in the placebo group had at least a 4-point decrease in the SGRQ score (difference, −2.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −11.6 to 6.3; adjusted odds ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.37; P=0.65). The mean change in the percent of predicted FEV(1) was 2.48 percentage points (95% CI, 1.49 to 3.47) in the treatment group and −0.09 percentage points (95% CI, −1.06 to 0.89) in the placebo group, and the mean change in the inspiratory capacity was 0.12 liters (95% CI, 0.07 to 0.18) in the treatment group and 0.02 liters (95% CI, −0.03 to 0.08) in the placebo group. Four serious adverse events occurred in the treatment group, and 11 occurred in the placebo group; none were deemed potentially related to the treatment or placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled dual bronchodilator therapy did not decrease respiratory symptoms in symptomatic, tobacco-exposed persons with preserved lung function as assessed by spirometry. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; RETHINC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02867761.)

Background: Forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV(1)) is central to the diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but is imprecise in classifying disease burden. We examined the potential of the maximal mid-expiratory flow rate (forced expiratory flow rate between 25% and 75% [FEF(25%-75%)]) as an additional tool for characterizing pathophysiology in COPD. Objective: To determine whether FEF(25%-75%) helps predict clinical and radiographic abnormalities in COPD. Study Design and Methods: The SubPopulations and InteRediate Outcome Measures In COPD Study (SPIROMICS) enrolled a prospective cohort of 2978 nonsmokers and ever-smokers, with and without COPD, to identify phenotypes and intermediate markers of disease progression. We used baseline data from 2771 ever-smokers from the SPIROMICS cohort to identify associations between percent predicted FEF(25%-75%) (%predFEF(25%-75%)) and both clinical markers and computed tomography (CT) findings of smoking-related lung disease. Results: Lower %predFEF(25-75%) was associated with more severe disease, manifested radiographically by increased functional small airways disease, emphysema (most notably with homogeneous distribution), CT-measured residual volume, total lung capacity (TLC), and airway wall thickness, and clinically by increased symptoms, decreased 6-minute walk distance, and increased bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR). A lower %predFEF(25-75%) remained significantly associated with increased emphysema, functional small airways disease, TLC, and BDR after adjustment for FEV(1) or forced vital capacity (FVC). Interpretation: The %predFEF(25-75%) provides additional information about disease manifestation beyond FEV(1). These associations may reflect loss of elastic recoil and air trapping from emphysema and intrinsic small airways disease. Thus, %predFEF(25-75%) helps link the anatomic pathology and deranged physiology of COPD.

Igor Z Barjaktarevic,1 Russell G Buhr,1,2 Xiaoyan Wang,3 Scott Hu,1 David Couper,4 Wayne Anderson,4 Richard E Kanner,5 Robert Paine III,5 Surya P Bhatt,6 Nirav R Bhakta,7 Mehrdad Arjomandi,7 Robert J Kaner,8 Cheryl S Pirozzi,5 Jeffrey L Curtis,9,10 Wanda K O’Neal,4 Prescott G Woodruff,7 MeiLan K Han,9 Fernando J Martinez,8 Nadia Hansel,11 James Michael Wells,6 Victor E Ortega,12 Eric A Hoffman,13 Claire M Doerschuk,4 Victor Kim,14 Mark T Dransfield,6 M Bradley Drummond,4 Russell Bowler,15 Gerard Criner,14 Stephanie A Christenson,7 Bonnie Ronish,5 Stephen P Peters,12 Jerry A Krishnan,16 Donald P Tashkin,1 Christopher B Cooper1 On behalf of the NHLBI SubPopulations and InteRmediate Outcome Measures In COPD Study (SPIROMICS)1Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 2Department of Health Policy and Management, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 3Department of General Internal Medicine and Health Services Research, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA; 4Department of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 5Department of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA; 6Division of Pulmonary, Allergy and Critical Care Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA; 7Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; 8Department of Medicine, Weill Cornell Weill Cornell Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; 9Department of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; 10Medicine Service, VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; 11Department of Medicine, John Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; 12Department of Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 13Department of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA; 14Department of Thoracic Medicine and Surgery, Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA; 15Department of Medicine, National Jewish Health Systems, Denver, CO, USA; 16Department of Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USACorrespondence: Christopher B CooperDepartments of Medicine and Physiology, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, 10833 Le Conte Avenue, 37-131 CHS, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USAEmail ccooper@mednet.ucla.eduObjective: Bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) is prevalent in COPD, but its clinical implications remain unclear. We explored the significance of BDR, defined by post-bronchodilator change in FEV1 (BDRFEV1) as a measure reflecting the change in flow and in FVC (BDRFVC) reflecting the change in volume.Methods: We analyzed 2974 participants from a multicenter observational study designed to identify varying COPD phenotypes (SPIROMICS). We evaluated the association of BDR with baseline clinical characteristics, rate of prospective exacerbations and mortality using negative binomial regression and Cox proportional hazards models.Results: A majority of COPD participants exhibited BDR (52.7%). BDRFEV1 occurred more often in earlier stages of COPD, while BDRFVC occurred more frequently in more advanced disease. When defined by increases in either FEV1 or FVC, BDR was associated with a self-reported history of asthma, but not with blood eosinophil counts. BDRFVC was more prevalent in subjects with greater emphysema and small airway disease on CT. In a univariate analysis, BDRFVC was associated with increased exacerbations and mortality, although no significance was found in a model adjusted for post-bronchodilator FEV1.Conclusion: With advanced airflow obstruction in COPD, BDRFVC is more prevalent in comparison to BDRFEV1 and correlates with the extent of emphysema and degree of small airway disease. Since these associations appear to be related to the impairment of FEV1, BDRFVC itself does not define a distinct phenotype nor can it be more predictive of outcomes, but it can offer additional insights into the pathophysiologic mechanism in advanced COPD.Clinical trials registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01969344T4.Keywords: bronchodilator responsiveness, inspiratory capacity, FVC, FEV1, SPIROMICS