OBJECTIVE: To assess the sensitivity and specificity of flow-volume curves in detecting central airway obstruction (CAO), and to determine whether their quantitative and qualitative criteria are associated with the location, type and degree of obstruction. METHODS: Over a four-month period, we consecutively evaluated patients with bronchoscopy indicated. Over a one-week period, all patients underwent clinical evaluation, flow-volume curve, bronchoscopy, and completed a dyspnea scale. Four reviewers, blinded to quantitative and clinical data, and bronchoscopy results, classified the morphology of the curves. A fifth reviewer determined the morphological criteria, as well as the quantitative criteria. RESULTS: We studied 82 patients, 36 (44%) of whom had CAO. The sensitivity and specificity of the flow-volume curves in detecting CAO were, respectively, 88.9% and 91.3% (quantitative criteria) and 30.6% and 93.5% (qualitative criteria). The most prevalent quantitative criteria in our sample were FEF50%/FIF50% ≥ 1, in 83% of patients, and FEV1/PEF ≥ 8 mL . L–1 . min–1, in 36%, both being associated with the type, location, and degree of obstruction (p < 0.05). There was concordance among the reviewers as to the presence of CAO. There is a relationship between the degree of obstruction and dyspnea. CONCLUSIONS: The quantitative criteria should always be calculated for flow-volume curves in order to detect CAO, because of the low sensitivity of the qualitative criteria. Both FEF50%/FIF50% ≥ 1 and FEV1/PEF ≥ 8 mL . L–1 . min–1 were associated with the location, type and degree of obstruction.
Usefulness of continuous monitoring of airway resistance and flow-volume curve in the perioperative management of infants with central airway obstruction: A case of vascular ring
