https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0289-1524
Figures
Abstract
Background
The single breath diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) captures several aspects of the role of the lung in meeting the metabolic demands of the body. The magnitude of the independent contributors to the DLCO is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the factors that independently contribute to the DLCO.
Objectives
The objective was to investigate the impact of height, age, sex and haemoglobin on DLCO, alveolar volume (VA) and carbon monoxide transfer coefficient (KCO).
Methods
Study participants were pre-screened based on normal exercise capacity achieved during an incremental cardio-pulmonary exercise testing (CPET) using cycle ergometry at McMaster University Medical Center between 1988–2012. Participants who had an FEV1>80% predicted, with an FEV1/FVC ≥0.7 and who achieved a maximum power output ≥80% were selected for analysis. In total, 16,298 subjects [61% male, mean height 1.70m (range 1.26–2.07), age 49 yrs (10–94), weight 79 kg (23–190) had DLCO measured while demonstrating normal spirometry and exercise capacity.
Citation: Priel E, Diab N, Patel M, Wahab M, Freitag A, O’Byrne PM, et al. (2023) The added value of haemoglobin to height, age, and sex to predict DLCO in subjects with preserved exercise capacity. PLoS ONE 18(8): e0289540. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0289540
Editor: Fredirick Lazaro Mashili, Muhimbili University of Health and Allied Sciences School of Medicine, UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Received: February 25, 2023; Accepted: July 21, 2023; Published: August 8, 2023
Copyright: © 2023 Priel et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: Derived data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author [I.S] on request. requests may also be made to the Hamilton Integrated Research Board, which approves the sharing of deidentified data from this database with other researchers; erebhelpdesk@hhsc.ca; The data are not publicly available due to their containing information that could compromise the privacy of participants.
Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.
Competing interests: POB reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from GSK, grants from Novartis, grants and personal fees from Medimmune, personal fees from Chiesi, outside the submitted work. IS reports grants from ERS Respire 3 Marie Curie fellowship, grants and personal fees from Merck Canada, personal fees from GSK, AstraZeneca, Respiplus, Genentech outside the submitted work.
Abbreviations: CPET, cardiopulmonary exercise test; CI, Confidence interval; DLCO, diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide; FEV1, Forced Expired Volume over one Second; FIF, Forced Inspiratory Flow; FVC, Forced Vital Capacity; Hb, Haemoglobin; KCO, The carbon monoxide transfer coefficient; MPO, maximal power output; PEFR, Peak Expiratory Flow Rate; SaO2, Oxygen Saturation; SD, standard deviation; TLC, Total Lung Capacity; VA, Single breath lung volume
Introduction
In 1914, Marie Krogh reported that carbon monoxide (CO) is transported at a maximum rate of 20 to 50 ml/mmHg/min from the alveoli to the circulating blood [1]. Based on the physical principles of diffusion, the maximum rates of transport are dependent on the solubility of the gases divided by the square root of its molecular weight and would predict the maximum rate for oxygen transport of 1.23*DLCO, and for carbon dioxide (CO2) transport of 24.6*DLCO, i.e., diffusion of CO2 was 20-fold greater. Despite this initial emphasis on diffusion, the DLCO is now known to capture communicating alveolar volume (VA), ventilation, perfusion, haemoglobin, carboxyhaemoglobin, blood flow and their interrelationships across individual alveolar units. Hence, capturing a single measurement covering such a broad range has obvious clinical appeal in diagnosis, rating disease severity and responses to treatment. Half a century later, measurement of the DLCO emerged in a clinical context and progressed with the commercial development of simplified testing [2]. The overall aim of this study was to investigate the factors that independently contribute to the DLCO. The effects of height, age and sex are accounted for in most reference equations. However, despite haemoglobin being the only carrier of oxygen and the observations seen in clinical practice of reduced DLCO in patients with anaemia [3], the magnitude of the effect of haemoglobin is unclear. In this study we used cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) to define functional capacity. Participants who had a preserved maximal power output with no spirometric deficit were defined as functionally normal, regardless of diagnostic labels or symptoms. The magnitude of the independent contribution of different components to the DLCO is reported.
Methods
Study design and subjects
This was a retrospective study based on data collected from sequential patients referred for clinical exercise testing at McMaster University Medical Center from 1988–2012. The indication for exercise testing was broad with the commonest indications for the assessment of exercise induced chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, and rehabilitation purposes. This population includes normal subjects and subjects with the common cardiopulmonary disorders of varying severity. Subjects who failed to exercise were excluded as they included patients unwilling to exercise and those limited by severe musculoskeletal pain. All the CPET testing was conducted in a clinical laboratory setting and informed verbal and written consent was taken from patients, parents or guardians prior to testing for performance of the test and use of this anonymized data for future research purposes. This study was approved by the Hamilton integrated research ethics board (14409-C) as a retrospective chart review.
Study population
A total of 37,672 subjects performed incremental cycle ergometry to symptom limitation and had a DLCO measured immediately prior to exercise. The total population were explored to ascertain the contribution of height, age, sex, muscle strength, spirometry and DLCO. Normal predicted values relative to height, age and sex were derived from 16,298 (43.2%) who had a normal exercise capacity and normal spirometry (Table 1).
Study procedures
After the risks of exercise were explained, informed consent for exercise testing was obtained. Clinical exercise testing done at McMaster University Medical Center includes spirometry relative to time and volume, DLCO (Single breath lung volume[VA] & carbon monoxide transfer coefficient [KCO]), and capillary blood gas [4]. Spirometry was measured with a maximum inspiratory and expiratory maneuver from residual volume (RV) to total lung capacity (TLC) yielding forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expired volume over one second (FEV1), peak expiratory flow rates (PEFR), forced expired volume at 25, 50 and 75% of the expired vital capacity, peak inspiratory flow rate at FIF 25, 50 and 75%. VA (Single breath lung volume), KCO and DLCO were measured [5]. Haemoglobin (Hb), carboxyhaemoglobin (HbCO), oxygen saturations (SaO2), and arterialized capillary blood gases were measured.
Statistical analyses
All statistical analysis was performed using Statistica version 13.2. Subjects were considered normal if no exercise limitation was observed (Maximal power output (MPO)≥80% predicted) and baseline spirometry was normal (FEV1/FVC≥0.7 and FEV1≥80% predicted). Descriptive demographic data in the total and normal populations are shown as mean, standard deviation (SD), minimum and maximum. Models are described with the estimated mean, 95% confidence intervals together with the derived Pearson r value for each equation.
Stepwise non-linear interactive modelling was performed with DLCO, VA and KCO as the dependent factor in subjects with no exercise limitation. Height, age<20, age>35, sex, haemoglobin were included as the independent contributing variables [6]. Age was dichotomised for the models for DLCO and VA to <20 and >35 to reflect lung volume growth to full skeletal maturity to age 20 and reduction after the age of 35.
Results
Contribution of height, age, sex, and haemoglobin in normal subjects to DLCO, VA and KCO
Since height, age, sex, and haemoglobin are interdependent, a biologically plausible non-linear interactive prediction equation was derived in the normal sub-group: DLCO = 5.58*Height(m)1.69*1.15 in Males*(1–0.006*Age>35)*(1–0.01*Age<20)*(1+0.06*Hb gm/dl), (r = 0.76, Table 2).
The 5th percentile of the DLCO was at 74% predicted. DLCO increased in an accelerating manner with height (Fig 1), gradually increased by 0.1% with age up to 20 at any given height (Fig 2) and then declined by 0.6% per year over the age of 35 (Fig 2), increased by 6% for each gram of haemoglobin increase (Fig 3) and was 15% higher in males (Fig 4). The pattern was the same for alveolar volume (VA) (Table 2, Figs 1–4).
DLCO = 5.3 *Height2.9; VA = 1.0 *Height3.2; KCO = 5.7 *Height-0.4.
The pattern for KCO was different. The KCO predicted was:
KCO (ml/mmHg/min/L) = 5.04*Height(m)-0.64*1.01 in Males*(1–0.004*Age) *(1+0.04*Hb gm/dl), (r = 0.51, Table 2).
The KCO decreased with height (Fig 1), declined monotonically by 0.4% per year (Fig 2), increased by 4% for each gram of Hb increase (Fig 3), and was 1% higher in males (Fig 4).
Discussion
Our data demonstrates that the DLCO was 15% higher in males and increased by 6% or 2.1 ml/mmHg/min with each gram of Hb. Age less than 20 and greater than 35 has less than a 1% effect per year, independent of height, sex and Hb. The KCO declines as lung volume increases commonly attributed to a decrease in ventilation perfusion matching with increasing lung volume.
Previous studies have tried to address normality in different populations, generating different reference values based on anthropomorphic features [7–10]. Once a normal range was defined, values below this are interpreted as an impairment in gas transfer capacity. However, an impairment is only as important as the disability it causes. The effort required to perform a certain physical challenge is not different between different ethnicities. Traversing a flight of stairs poses the same challenge to Caucasians, African Americans, and people of Asian ethnicity. This study is unique in that “normality” was determined as subjects with an objectively demonstrated normal capacity to exercise with no spirometric deficits. This is a functional definition based on disability. No random collection of normal subjects based on inclusion and exclusion criteria have ever validated that the subjects included had an objective demonstration of a normal capacity to exercise and were asymptomatic based on the achievement of a normal maximal power with a demonstrated normal symptom response. This novel approach to normal was never used before to our knowledge. In this context, any deficiency in haemoglobin, while influenced results, did not cause functional impairment. These results therefore show the spectrum of normal relationships between the different measured variables and the DLCO.
This study was not designed to provide novel reference equations for this functionally normal population, but to show the additional benefit of haemoglobin, a mostly unmeasured significant component of the DLCO, to age sex and height. When compared to recent studies, some of which were designed to provide regression equations for DLCO [11] our study adds in that quantification of the contribution of hemoglobin becomes available.
The DLCO, initially introduced to measure diffusion capacity, is dependent on ventilation /perfusion distribution across alveoli, ventilation and perfusion relative to alveolar volume distribution, ventilation, diffusion and perfusion distribution across the lungs, Hb, cardiac output and any variations in the chemical reactions and ion shifts required for oxygen carriage. In this sense, the DLCO is a very useful measurement of gas exchange. The utility of the DLCO is under appreciated relative to spirometry. The DLCO is determined by the product of two separate measurements, VA and KCO, and each are influenced by different factors [12]. The VA- single breath lung volume, alveolar volume, communicating lung volume or accessible lung volume, is influenced by the number and expansion of the alveoli and in turn alveolar damage. While sex, age, and height influence VA, these result from biological processes. There are known differences in lung development between males and females which starts at an early age [13], such as differences in alveolar size and number contributing to a higher VA in males [14]. The KCO represents the integrity of the capillary bed and the cardiac output. Lower DLCO is associated with higher ventilatory demand during exercise [15] and lower cardiac output [16]. DLCO is currently not tested routinely for patients with unexplained dyspnea. Unpublished Data from our group supports the notion that the impact of an absolute reduced DLCO in a symptomatic patient warrants investigations to delineate the underlying cause.
In this study, lower Hb was associated with a lower DLCO and KCO. This was expected given that gas exchange across the alveolar-capillary interface is influenced by the concentration of haemoglobin [12, 17]. The relationship between Hb and DLCO was sigmoidal (Fig 3). This could be explained by a higher cardiac output in subjects with a lower Hb, as a compensation for anemia, and relative saturation of Hb at the higher levels. An unexpected finding was that a higher Hb influences VA. As a similar association appears with height over 1.5m and an increased slope until the age of 20, a possible explanation could be the effects of testosterone on erythropoiesis [18].
This is the first study to provide empirical data of Hb, as most pulmonary function testing does not include measuring Hb, including the GLI reference values [19]. The 2005 ATS/ERS standardization document recommends DLCO values should be corrected for Hb using the equation derived by John Cotes and colleagues, which assumes a partial pressure of oxygen of 100mmHg, and a fixed diffusion capacity of 0.7 ml/min/mmHg [17, 20]. These provide a simple linear imputation relative to 14.6g/dL for males over 15 yrs and 13.4 g/dL for females and children, but empirical data from our dataset and from general population were significantly different from these [21, 22]. This study found it to be the third most important contributor to DLCO and supports the ATS/ERS recommendations to correct measurements to an individual’s Hb level [23, 24].
There are limitations to this study. First, this is a retrospective study in a single centre potentially leading to selection bias. However, this can also be advantageous as it reduces errors between sites using different equipment and performed at different altitudes. Second, the reference values were not calculated from healthy controls per se, from the general community, but in patients with a normal exercise test and normal spirometry. Random selection from the general community could have been used, but this would not guarantee a ‘healthy control’. Third, we did not address the representation of the data as a percentage of predicted normal values because the physiological costs are absolute and not relative to a predicted mean. Fourth, our criteria for normality (i.e., FEV1/FVC ratio, normal FEV1, MPO>80% predicted) may be a source of selection bias, since the FEV1/FVC ratio is age dependent. We believe that the small numbers of patients in the extremity of ages, the minimal influence of age on the DLCO and the large overall number of study participants, together with normal functional outcomes, balances any significant bias, however this can not be tested with the available data. Fifth, we do not have data on current or previous smoking or pack year history, which may be relevant information, since smoking can have an effect on DLCO.
Conclusions
The most important contributors to DLCO in a population with no exercise impairment and normal spirometry are height, sex, Hb and age. Haemoglobin is an important contributor to DLCO, and should be incorporated into measurements when performing pulmonary function testing.
References
- 1. Krogh M. The diffusion of gases through the lungs of man. J Physiol (Lond). 1915 May 12;49(4):271–300. pmid:16993296
- 2. Blakemore WS, Forster RE, Morton JW, Ogilvie CM. A standardized breath holding technique for the clinical measurement of the diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide. J Clin Invest. 1957 Jan;36(1 Part 1):1–17. pmid:13398477
- 3. Guo J, Zheng C, Xiao Q, Gong S, Zhao Q, Wang L, et al. Impact of anaemia on lung function and exercise capacity in patients with stable severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. BMJ Open. 2015 Oct 8;5(10):e008295. pmid:26450428
- 4. Priel E, Wahab M, Mondal T, Freitag A, O’Byrne PM, Killian KJ, et al. The Impact of beta blockade on the cardio-respiratory system and symptoms during exercise. Current Research in Physiology. 2021;4:235–242. pmid:34988470
- 5. Graham BL, Brusasco V, Burgos F, Cooper BG, Jensen R, Kendrick A, et al. Executive Summary: 2017 ERS/ATS standards for single-breath carbon monoxide uptake in the lung. Eur Respir J. 2017 Jan 3;49(1).
- 6. Satia I, Farooqi MAM, Cusack R, Matsuoka M, Yanqing X, Kurmi O, et al. The contribution of FEV1 and airflow limitation on the intensity of dyspnea and leg effort during exercise. Insights from a real-world cohort. Physiol Rep. 2020;8(8):e14415. pmid:32323482
- 7. Crapo RO, Morris AH. Standardized single breath normal values for carbon monoxide diffusing capacity. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1981 Feb;123(2):185–189. pmid:7235357
- 8. Knudson RJ, Kaltenborn WT, Knudson DE, Burrows B. The Single-Breath Carbon Monoxide Diffusing Capacity. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1987 Apr;135(4):805–811.
- 9. Thornton Miller A., Warshaw, R, et al: Single breath diffusing capacity In a representative sample of the population of Michigan, a large industrial state. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1983.
- 10. Vazquez-Garcia JC, Perez-Padilla R, Casas A, Schonffeldt-Guerrero P, Pereira J, Vargas-Dominguez C, et al. Reference Values for the Diffusing Capacity Determined by the Single-Breath Technique at Different Altitudes: The Latin American Single-Breath Diffusing Capacity Reference Project. Respir Care. 2016 Sep 1;61(9):1217–1223. pmid:27587868
- 11. Wada Y, Goto N, Kitaguchi Y, Yasuo M, Hanaoka M. Referential equations for pulmonary diffusing capacity using GAMLSS models derived from Japanese individuals with near-normal lung function. PLoS One. 2022 Jul 21;17(7):e0271129. pmid:35862393
- 12. Hughes JMB, Pride NB. Examination of the carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (DL(CO)) in relation to its KCO and VA components. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012 Jul 15;186(2):132–139. pmid:22538804
- 13. Mead J. Dysanapsis in normal lungs assessed by the relationship between maximal flow, static recoil, and vital capacity. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1980 Feb;121(2):339–342. pmid:7362140
- 14. Thurlbeck WM. Postnatal human lung growth. Thorax. 1982 Aug;37(8):564–571. pmid:7179184
- 15. Elbehairy AF, O’Donnell CD, Abd Elhameed A, Vincent SG, Milne KM, James MD, et al. Low resting diffusion capacity, dyspnea, and exercise intolerance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Appl Physiol. 2019 Oct 1;127(4):1107–1116. pmid:31369329
- 16. Puri S, Baker BL, Dutka DP, Oakley CM, Hughes JM, Cleland JG. Reduced alveolar-capillary membrane diffusing capacity in chronic heart failure. Its pathophysiological relevance and relationship to exercise performance. Circulation. 1995 Jun 1;91(11):2769–2774. pmid:7758183
- 17. Cotes JE, Dabbs JM, Elwood PC, Hall AM, McDonald A, Saunders MJ. Iron-deficiency anaemia: its effect on transfer factor for the lung (diffusiong capacity) and ventilation and cardiac frequency during sub-maximal exercise. Clin Sci. 1972 Mar;42(3):325–335. pmid:5013875
- 18. Bhasin S, Woodhouse L, Casaburi R, Singh AB, Bhasin D, Berman N, et al. Testosterone dose-response relationships in healthy young men. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2001 Dec;281(6):E1172–81. pmid:11701431
- 19. Stanojevic S, Graham BL, Cooper BG, Thompson BR, Carter KW, Francis RW, et al. Official ERS technical standards: Global Lung Function Initiative reference values for the carbon monoxide transfer factor for Caucasians. Eur Respir J. 2017 Sep 11;50(3). pmid:28893868
- 20. Cotes JE, Chinn DJ, Quanjer PH, Roca J, Yernault JC. Standardization of the measurement of transfer factor (diffusing capacity). Eur Respir J. 1993 Mar;6 Suppl 16:41–52.
- 21. Hollowell JG, van Assendelft OW, Gunter EW, Lewis BG, Najjar M, Pfeiffer C, et al. Hematological and iron-related analytes—reference data for persons aged 1 year and over: United States, 1988–94. Vital Health Stat 11. 2005 Mar;(247):1–156. pmid:15782774
- 22. Beutler E, Waalen J. The definition of anemia: what is the lower limit of normal of the blood hemoglobin concentration? Blood. 2006 Mar 1;107(5):1747–1750. pmid:16189263
- 23. Pellegrino R, Viegi G, Brusasco V, Crapo RO, Burgos F, Casaburi R, et al. Interpretative strategies for lung function tests. Eur Respir J. 2005 Nov;26(5):948–968. pmid:16264058
- 24. Macintyre N, Crapo RO, Viegi G, Johnson DC, van der Grinten CPM, Brusasco V, et al. Standardisation of the single-breath determination of carbon monoxide uptake in the lung. Eur Respir J. 2005 Oct;26(4):720–735. pmid:16204605