An alternative method for measuring total respiratory resistance during quiet breathing: a feasibility and validation study

N. Anagnostopoulos, A. Tzortzi, K. Cholidou, V. Evangelopoulou, G. Kaltsakas, E. Koukaki, G. Stratakos, M. Lymperi, P. Behrakis, M. Koutsilieris

First Respiratory Clinic, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Sotiria Hospital, Athens, Greece. aris.anag@yahoo.gr

---

• Respiratory Medicine

OBJECTIVE: Determining the respiratory system’s mechanical properties with minimal patient effort has been an important field of investigation addressing patients unable to perform pulmonary function testing and in light of the preventive measures due to the recent pandemic. The current study aimed to present an alternative method for total respiratory resistance measurement during tidal breathing, compare it with airway resistance (Raw), measured by body plethysmography, and validate the procedure in three groups of subjects with normal, constrictive and obstructive respiratory patterns in spirometry.

PATIENTS AND METHODS: We developed an alternative method of assessing total respiratory resistance during quiet breathing. After manufacturing the appropriate hardware apparatus, we applied a steady extrinsic resistance (ΔR) for 100-200 m/s during tidal breathing. Α theoretical mathematical model allowed measurement of total respiratory resistance (Rtot) during inspiration (Rin) and expiration (Rex). To validate the method, 15 individuals were enrolled and assigned to the normal, obstructive and restrictive groups based on their spirometry patterns. All groups participated in two sets of measurements, the plethysmographic and novel method. Finally, respiratory resistance measurements were compared between groups and methods.

RESULTS: The method was successfully developed, and Rtot measurements were recorded in five normal subjects and in five obstructive and restrictive subjects. Mean Rin and mean Rex were 4.99 cm H2O/L/sec and 4.42 cm H2O/L/sec in the healthy, 4.87 cm H2O/L/sec, and 6.63 cm H2O/L/sec in the obstructive and 5.97 cm H2O/L/sec and 4.12 cm H2O/L/sec in the restrictive group, respectively. Rex was notably higher than Rin in the obstructive group and was positively correlated with Raw (p<0.005, r=0.47).

CONCLUSIONS: This method provides the theoretical background for a plausible alternative tool for accessing a mechanical parameter of the respiratory system, which is easy to perform and requires only passive patient cooperation while enabling rough differentiation between obstructive and restrictive disorders. The model’s feasibility potential in a real-life setting was studied in a small sample, and additional implementation and validation of the method in a larger population are guaranteed.

Free PDF Download