Body plethysmography allows to assess functional residual capacity (FRC(pleth)) and specific airway resistance (sRaw) as primary measures. In combination with deep expirations and inspirations, total lung capacity (TLC) and residual volume (RV) can be determined. Airway resistance (Raw) is calculated as the ratio of sRaw to FRC(pleth). Raw is a measure of airway obstruction and indicates the alveolar pressure needed to establish a flow rate of 1 L s(-1). In contrast, sRaw can be interpreted as the work to be performed by volume displacement to establish this flow rate. These measures represent different functional aspects and should both be considered. The measurement relies on the fact that generation of airflow needs generation of pressure. Pressure generation means that a mass of air is compressed or decompressed relative to its equilibrium volume. This difference is called "shift volume". As the body box is sealed and has rigid walls, its free volume experiences the same, mirror image-like shift volume as the lung. This shift volume can be measured via the variation of box pressure. The relationship between shift volume and alveolar pressure is assessed in a shutter maneuver, by identifying mouth and alveolar pressure under zero-flow conditions. These variables are combined to obtain FRC(pleth), sRaw and Raw. This presentation aims at providing the reader with a thorough and precise but non-technical understanding of the working principle of body plethysmography. It also aims at showing that this method yields significant additional information compared to spirometry and even bears a potential for further development.

In asthma, airways constrict in response to emotion and stress, but underlying mechanisms, potential extrathoracic contributions, and associations with airway pathophysiology have not been elucidated. We therefore investigated the role of the cholinergic pathway in emotion-induced airway responses in patients with asthma and the association of these responses with airway pathophysiology. Patients with asthma (n=54) and healthy participants (n=25) received either 40 microg ipratropium bromide or a placebo in a double-blind double-dummy cross-over design in two laboratory sessions with experimental emotion induction. Stimuli were preevaluated films and pictures of pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral quality. Respiratory resistance and reactance at 5 and 20 Hz were measured continuously before and during presentations, together with respiration by impedance plethysmography and end-tidal PCO2 by capnometry. In addition, measures of airway inflammation (fraction of exhaled nitric oxide), airway hyperreactivity (methacholine challenge), and reversibility of obstruction were obtained. Respiratory resistance at 5 and 20 Hz increased during unpleasant stimuli in asthma patients. This response was blocked by ipratropium bromide and was not substantially associated with asthma severity, airway inflammation, hyperreactivity and reversibility, or pattern of ventilation and PCO2. Under the placebo condition, changes in resistance during unpleasant films were positively correlated with patients' reports of psychological asthma triggers. In conclusion, airway constriction to unpleasant stimuli in asthma depends on an intact cholinergic pathway, is largely due to the central airways, and is not substantially associated with other indicators of airway pathology. Its link to the perceived psychological triggers in patients' daily lives suggests a physiological basis for emotion-induced asthma.

BackgroundThere are few studies comparing diagnostic accuracy of different lung function parameters evaluating dose–response characteristics of methacholine (MCH) challenge tests (MCT) as quantitative outcome of airway hyperreactivity (AHR) in asthmatic patients. The aim of this retrospectively analysis of our database (Clinic Barmelweid, Switzerland) was, to assess diagnostic accuracy of several lung function parameters quantitating AHR by dose–response characteristics.MethodsChanges in effective specific airway conductance (sGeff) as estimate of the degree of bronchial obstruction were compared with concomitantly measured forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) and forced expiratory flows at 50% forced vital capacity (FEF50). According to the GINA Guidelines the patients (n = 484) were classified into asthmatic patients (n = 337) and non-asthmatic subjects (n = 147). Whole-body plethysmography (CareFusion, Würzburg, Germany) was performed using ATS-ERS criteria, and for the MCTs a standardised computer controlled protocol with 3 consecutive cumulative provocation doses (PD1: 0.2 mg; PD2: 1.0 mg; PD3: 2.2 mg) was used. Break off criterion for the MCTs were when a decrease in FEV1 of 20% was reached or respiratory symptoms occurred.ResultsIn the assessment of AHR, whole-body plethysmography offers in addition to spirometry indices of airways conductance and thoracic lung volumes, which are incorporated in the parameter sGeff, derived from spontaneous tidal breathing. The cumulative percent dose-responses at each provocation step were at the 1st level step (0.2 mg MCH) 3.7 times, at the 2nd level step (1 mg MCH) 2.4 times, and at the 3rd level step (2.2 mg MCH) 2.0 times more pronounced for sGeff, compared to FEV1. A much better diagnostic odds ratio of sGeff (7.855) over FEV1 (6.893) and FEF50 (4.001) could be found. Moreover, the so-called dysanapsis, and changes of end-expiratory lung volume were found to be important determinants of AHR.ConclusionsApplying plethysmographic tidal breathing analysis in addition to spirometry in MCTs provides relevant advantages. The absence of deep and maximal inhalations and forced expiratory manoeuvres improve the subject’s cooperation and coordination, and provide sensitive and differentiated test results, improving diagnostic accuracy. Moreover, by the combined assessment, pulmonary hyperinflation and dysanapsis can be respected in the differentiation between “asthmatics” and “non-asthmatics”.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12931-016-0470-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

While methacholine (MCH) testing is commonly used in the clinical diagnosis of asthma, the detection of airway narrowing often relies on either spirometry or body plethysmography, however comparative studies are rare. In this study we performed MCH testing in 37 patients with variable shortness of breath at work and in 37 patients with no history of airway disease. The inclusion criteria were: no acute respiratory infection within 6 weeks, no severe diseases, normal baseline specific airway resistance (sR(aw)), normal baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)), Tiffeneau index >70%, no previous treatment with steroids within 14 days and no short acting bronchodilators within 24 h. Cumulative doses of 0.003, 0.014, 0.059, 0.239 and 0.959 mg MCH were inhaled by a dosimeter method. A FEV(1) decrease of ≥20% from baseline and a 100% increase of sR(aw) to ≥2.0 kPa/s was defined as end-of-test-criterion. Provocation doses were calculated by interpolation. Performance of lung function parameters was compared using receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) analysis. ROC analysis resulted in an area under the ROC curve (AUC) of 0.74 for FEV(1) vs. 0.82 for sR(aw). The corresponding Youden Indices (J) were 0.46 for FEV(1) and 0.57 for sR(aw). The Youden Index of sR(aw) was higher and sensitivity and specificity (73%/84%) were rather well-balanced, in contrast to FEV(1) (54%/92%). In conclusion, in cumulative MCH challenges sR(aw) was found to be the overall most useful parameter for the detection of bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Body plethysmography yielded a balanced sensitivity-specificity ratio with higher sensitivity than spirometry, but comparable specificity.

Background Airflow reversibility criteria in COPD are still debated – especially in situations of co-existing COPD and asthma. Bronchodilator response (BDR) is usually assessed by spirometric parameters. Changes assessed by plethysmographic parameters such as the effective, specific airway conductance (sG eff ), and changes in end-expiratory resting level at functional residual capacity (FRC pleth ) are rarely appreciated. We aimed to assess BDR by spirometric and concomitantly measured plethysmographic parameters. Moreover, BDR on the specific aerodynamic work of breathing (sWOB) was evaluated. Methods From databases of 3 pulmonary centers, BDR to 200 g salbutamol was retrospectively evaluated by spirometric (∆FEV 1 and ∆FEF 25–75 ), and plethysmographic (∆sG eff , ∆FRC pleth , and ∆sWOB) parameters in a total of 843 patients diagnosed as COPD (478 = 57%), asthma-COPD-overlap (ACO) (139 = 17%), or asthma (226 = 27%), encountering 1686 BDR-measurement-sets (COPD n = 958; ACO n = 276; asthma n = 452). Results Evaluating z-score improvement taking into consideration the whole pre-test z-score range, highest BDR was achieved by combining ∆sG eff and ∆FRC detecting BDR in 62.2% (asthma: 71.4%; ACO: 56.7%; COPD: 59.8%), by ∆sG eff in 53.4% (asthma: 69.1%; ACO: 51.6%; COPD: 47.4%), whereas ∆FEV 1 only distinguished in 10.6% (asthma: 21.8%; ACO: 18.6%; COPD: 4.2%). Remarkably, ∆sWOB detected BDR in 49.4% (asthma: 76.2%; ACO: 47.8%; COPD: 46.9%). Conclusion BDR largely depends on the pre-test functional severity and, therefore, should be evaluated in relation to the pre-test conditions expressed as ∆z-scores, considering changes in airway dynamics, changes in static lung volumes and changes in small airway function. Plethysmographic parameters demonstrated BDR at a significant higher rate than spirometric parameters.

BackgroundDynamic gas compression during forced expiration has an influence on conventional flow-volume spirometry results. The extent of gas compression in different pulmonary disorders remains obscure. Utilizing a flow plethysmograph we determined the difference between thoracic and mouth flows during forced expiration as an indication of thoracic gas compression in subjects with different pulmonary diseases characterized by limitations in pulmonary mechanics.MethodsPatients with emphysema (N = 16), interstitial lung disease (ILD) (N = 15), obesity (N = 15) and healthy controls (N = 16) were included. Compressed expiratory flow-volume curves (at mouth) and corresponding compression-free curves (thoracic) were recorded. Peak flow (PEF) and maximal flows at 75%, 50% and 25% of remaining forced vital capacity (MEF75, MEF50 and MEF25) were derived from both recordings. Their respective difference was assessed as an indicator of gas compression.ResultsIn all groups, significant differences between thoracic and mouth flows were found at MEF50 (p < 0.01). In controls, a significant difference was also measured at MEF75 (p <0.005), in emphysema subjects, at PEF and MEF75 (p < 0.05, p < 0.005) and in obese subjects at MEF75 (p <0.005) and MEF25 (p < 0.01). ILD patients showed the lowest difference between thoracic and mouth flows at MEF75 relative to controls and emphysema patients (p < 0.005, p < 0.001). Obese subjects did not differ from controls, however, the difference between thoracic and mouth flows was significantly higher than in patients with emphysema at MEF50 (p < 0.001) and MEF25 (p < 0.005).ConclusionsAlveolar gas compression distorts the forced expiratory flow volume curve in all studied groups at the middle fraction of forced expiratory flow. Consequently, mouth flows are underestimated and the reduction of flow measured at 75% and 50% of vital capacity is often considerable. However, gas compression profiles in stiff lungs, in patients with decreased elastic recoil in emphysema and in obesity differ; the difference between thoracic and mouth flows in forced expiration was minimal in ILD at the first part of forced expiration and was higher in obesity than in emphysema at the middle and last parts of forced expiration.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creat ive Commo ns Attri bution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Previous studies have inconsistently shown changes in expiratory flows and volumes as well as diffusion capacity of the lungs after single dives and several diving related occupational conditions were considered as possible underlying factors. In this study mechanical impedance of the airways was measured before and after simulated dives to non-invasively determine whether there is evidence for lung function impairment due to hyperbaric exposure. Thirty-three healthy male divers employing air self-contained underwater breathing apparatus were randomly assigned to dry and wet chamber dives in a cross-over design to 600 kPa ambient pressure (total duration 43 min, bottom time 15 min, water temperature 24 degrees C). Immediately before and after diving, oscillometric parameters-e. g. resistance and reactance of the respiratory tract-were measured at defined frequencies (5, 20 Hz). Spirometry was carried out as well (FVC, FEV(1), MEF 25-75). No significant changes between post-exposure values and baseline values were detected by respiratory impedance and spirometry. Diving in accordance to diving regulations and without excessive workload is not a source for acute obstructive lung function changes as the obtained oscillometric data suggested. Moreover this study could not confirm changes in spirometry after simulated diving exposure.