This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by McKeoughl, Z J Articles by Bye, P T.P Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by McKeoughl, Z J Articles by Bye, P T.P Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Supported and unsupported arm exercise capacity following lung volume reduction surgery: a pilot study

School of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Sydney University, Australia;Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia;Department of Respiratory Medicine,Level 11 Edinburgh Building, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Missenden Road, Camperdown NSW, Australia 2050; zoebw(med.usyd.edu.au

J A Alison

School of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Sydney University, Australia;Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia

M S Bayfield

Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia

P T.P Bye

Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia

Study Objectives: Lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) has been shown to improve lung function, leg exercise capacity and quality of life in subjects with severe COPD. This is the first study to examine the effect of LVRS on supported and unsupported arm exercise capacity. Design: Eight subjects with COPD (% pred FEV₁ ±SD = 31.1 ± 9.8%) completed testing. At baseline (TI), after eight weeks pulmonary rehabilitation (T2) and four months after LVRS (T3), each subject had tests of lung function, and performed three symptom-limited exercise tests to peak work capacity:supported arm exercise (SAE), unsupported arm exercise (UAE) and leg exercise (LE).Measurements: The FEV₁ (% pred) increased from 27.8 ± 7.4 (mean ± SD) at T2 to 36.3 ± 7.1 at T3 (P <0.05). Peak oxygen consumption (VO₂) remained similar from TI to T2 for SAE, UAE and LE (all P=1.0) but increased from T2 to T3 (P <0.05) (SAE: T2 = 0.59 ± 0.2 L/min,T3 = 0.72 ± 0.1 L/min; UAE: T2 = 0.45 ± 0.1 L/min, T3 = 0.54 ± 0.1 L/min; LE:T2-0.68 ± 0.2 L/min, T3 = 0.81 ± 0.2 L/min). The ratio of end-expiratory lung volume to total lung capacity was reduced at peak SAE and LE from T2 to T3 (P < 0.01) (SAE:T2 = 81 ± 4.0%, T3 = 76 ± 2.7%; LE: T2-81 ± 5.1%, T3 = 75 ± 3.6%). Conclusion: There was a significant increase in SAE and UAE capacity following LVRS. Dynamic hyperinflation wras reduced during SAE following LVRS.

Key Words: arm exercise capacity • chronic obstructive pulmonary disease • thoracic surgery • Introduction

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?