Interpretation of lung function values in children with cystic fibrosis (CF) depends on the applied reference values. We hypothesize that differences between the new global lung function initiative (GLI) values and the formerly used Zapletal et al. values produce significantly different clinical results. We analyzed 3719 lung function measurements of 108 children and adolescents (n = 54 male; aged 6–18 years) with CF treated between September 1991 and July 2009. Data were analyzed in milliliters (ml) and % predicted (pred.) and interpreted using Zapletal and GLI reference values. Applying GLI compared to Zapletal resulted in significantly lower mean forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV1)% pred. values: Zapletal 86.6% (SD 20.6), GLI 79.9% (SD 20.3) and 32% (n = 497/1543) were misclassified as normal when using Zapletal. Despite showing no overall differences in FEV1 and forced vital capacity (FVC) between concomitant Pseudomonas detection (PA+) in n = 938 and Pseudomonas negative (PA-) (n = 2781) using either reference PA+ resulted in lower FEV1 and FVC values with increasing age; however, measurement of small airway obstruction with forced expiratory flow at 75% of FVC (FEF75) values – available for Zapletal –showed significant differences. Reassurance regarding lung function when using old reference values may occur with potential clinical significance. Discrepancies in lung function interpretation underline the importance of using uniform and best available reference values.
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift – Springer Journals
Published: Mar 9, 2017
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera