BioMedical Engineering OnLine (May 2020)

Measuring lung mechanics of expiratory tidal breathing with non-invasive breath occlusion

  • Sarah L. Howe,
  • Melanie März,
  • Sabine Krüger-Ziolek,
  • Bernhard Laufer,
  • Chris Pretty,
  • Geoffery M. Shaw,
  • Thomas Desaive,
  • Knut Möller,
  • J. Geoffrey Chase

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-020-00777-0
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 16

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background and objective Lung mechanics measurements provide clinically useful information about disease progression and lung health. Currently, there are no commonly practiced methods to non-invasively measure both resistive and elastic lung mechanics during tidal breathing, preventing the important information provided by lung mechanics from being utilised. This study presents a novel method to easily assess lung mechanics of spontaneously breathing subjects using a dynamic elastance, single-compartment lung model. Methods A spirometer with a built-in shutter was used to occlude expiration during tidal breathing, creating exponentially decaying flow when the shutter re-opened. The lung mechanics measured were respiratory system elastance and resistance, separated from the exponentially decaying flow, and interrupter resistance calculated at shutter closure. Progressively increasing resistance was added to the spirometer mouthpiece to simulate upper airway obstruction. The lung mechanics of 17 healthy subjects were successfully measured through spirometry. Results N = 17 (8 female, 9 male) healthy subjects were recruited. Measured decay rates ranged from 5 to 42/s, subjects with large variation of decay rates showed higher muscular breathing effort. Lung elastance measurements ranged from 3.9 to 21.2 cmH $$_2$$ 2 O/L, with no clear trend between change in elastance and added resistance. Resistance calculated from decay rate and elastance ranged from 0.15 to 1.95 cmH $$_2$$ 2 Os/L. These very small resistance values are due to the airflow measured originating from low-resistance areas in the centre of airways. Occlusion resistance measurements were as expected for healthy subjects, and increased as expected as resistance was added. Conclusions This test was able to identify reasonable dynamic lung elastance and occlusion resistance values, providing new insight into expiratory breathing effort. Clinically, this lung function test could impact current practice. It does not require high levels of cooperation from the subject, allowing a wider cohort of patients to be assessed more easily. Additionally, this test can be simply implemented in a small standalone device, or with standard lung function testing equipment.

Keywords