International Journal of COPD (Jun 2022)
Differences in the Measurement of Functional Residual Capacity Between Body Plethysmographs of Two Manufacturers
Abstract
Peter Alter,1 Jan Orszag,2,3 Emiel FM Wouters,4,5 Claus F Vogelmeier,1 Rudolf A Jörres2 1Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg (UMR), Germany, Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Marburg, Germany; 2Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational, Social and Environmental Medicine, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Munich, Germany; 3Department of Anaesthesiology, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany; 4Department of Respiratory Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, Netherlands; 5Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Lung Health, Vienna, AustriaCorrespondence: Peter Alter, Department of Medicine, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg (UMR), Baldingerstrasse, Marburg, 35033, Germany, Email [email protected]: Body plethysmography is a fundamental method for the assessment of static lung volumes. Although equipment is provided by several manufacturers, there are no established cross-vendor tools for quality control. In the process of quality control and analysis of data on hyperinflation from the large COPD cohort COSYCONET, hints appeared that plethysmographs of different vendors might yield different values for static lung volumes. Functional residual capacity (FRC) differed about 0.67 litres between plethysmographs of the manufacturer Vyaire and Ganshorn. Absolute differences of residual lung volume (RV) and total lung capacity (TLC) were similar. It appears undeniable that differences of this magnitude have an impact on clinical interpretation. Thus, device harmonization seems to be required.Keywords: lung function, body plethysmography, static lung volumes, functional residual capacity
