Skip to main content

Response to “Normal spirometry equates to normal impulse oscillometry in healthy subjects”

We thank B. Lipworth and R. Chan for their constructive comments on our article “Impulse oscillometry for detection of small airway dysfunction in subjects with chronic respiratory symptoms and preserved pulmonary function” [1]. We really appreciate that they mentioned the pragmatic abnormal IOS values in their clinic. The cutoff values obtained in our study are lower than the abnormal values in their study and some others’ [2,3,4]. But the target population in the above studies were patients who were diagnosed with COPD or asthma. In contrast, our subjects were those who do not meet the pulmonary function criteria of COPD or asthma, only presenting small airway dysfunction (SAD) in spirometry. A large multistage stratified sampling survey in China showed that more than 20% of Chinese suffered from such pure SAD with preserved pulmonary function [5]. Our object was to explore a better screening tool targeting such a population. Besides, the differences in race and age would influence the results when the absolute IOS values rather than the predicted percent values were used. The biggest limitation of our study was the small sample size, especially for the size of SAD population, which is only 42. Future studies with large sample size and the application of IOS predicted percent values are needed.

We agree with the authors regarding the false positive possibility of spirometry. Up to now, there is still not a gold standard for SAD. On account of the effort dependence, spirometry is not objective enough to evaluate SAD. Prospective studies should use more objective measurements as the standard.

All in all, as exploratory research, our major objective was to confirm the better sensitivity and correlation with symptoms of IOS compared to spirometry, rather than to find a definite cutoff value. The early detection of SAD facilitates early getting out of risk factors such as cigarettes. And we usually do not give too many clinical or drug interventions to these people. Which is the most important is that the results of spirometry or IOS should not be considered alone but combined with symptoms and images.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

IOS:

Impulse oscillometry

COPD:

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

SAD:

Small airway dysfunction

References

  1. 1.

    Li LY, Yan TS, Yang J, Li YQ, Fu LX, Lan L, Liang BM, Wang MY, Luo FM. Impulse oscillometry for detection of small airway dysfunction in subjects with chronic respiratory symptoms and preserved pulmonary function. Respir Res. 2021;22:68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Lipworth B, Manoharan A, Anderson W. Unlocking the quiet zone: the small airway asthma phenotype. Lancet Respir Med. 2014;2:497–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Anderson WJ, Zajda E, Lipworth BJ. Are we overlooking persistent small airways dysfunction in community-managed asthma? Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2012;109(185–189):e182.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Crisafulli E, Pisi R, Aiello M, Vigna M, Tzani P, Torres A, Bertorelli G, Chetta A. Prevalence of small-airway dysfunction among COPD patients with different GOLD stages and its role in the impact of disease. Respiration. 2017;93:32–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Xiao D, Chen Z, Wu S, Huang K, Xu J, Yang L, Xu Y, Zhang X, Bai C, Kang J, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of small airway dysfunction, and association with smoking, in China: findings from a national cross-sectional study. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8:1081–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

All authors were responsible for writing the letter. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Feng-Ming Luo.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Li, LY., Yan, TS., Yang, J. et al. Response to “Normal spirometry equates to normal impulse oscillometry in healthy subjects”. Respir Res 22, 111 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-021-01721-z

Download citation

\