Alterations of diaphragm and rib cage morphometry in severe COPD patients by CT analysis

Inspiratory muscle training, with or without concomitant pulmonary rehabilitation, for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)

BACKGROUND

Inspiratory muscle training (IMT) aims to improve respiratory muscle strength and endurance. Clinical trials used various training protocols, devices and respiratory measurements to check the effectiveness of this intervention. The current guidelines reported a possible advantage of IMT, particularly in people with respiratory muscle weakness. However, it remains unclear to what extent IMT is clinically beneficial, especially when associated with pulmonary rehabilitation (PR).   OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), as a stand-alone intervention and when combined with pulmonary rehabilitation (PR).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) EBSCO, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 20 October 2021. We also checked reference lists of all primary studies and review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IMT in combination with PR versus PR alone and IMT versus control/sham. We included different types of IMT irrespective of the mode of delivery. We excluded trials that used resistive devices without controlling the breathing pattern or a training load of less than 30% of maximal inspiratory pressure (PImax), or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane including assessment of risk of bias with RoB 2. Our primary outcomes were dyspnea, functional exercise capacity and health-related quality of life.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 55 RCTs in this review. Both IMT and PR protocols varied significantly across the trials, especially in training duration, loads, devices, number/ frequency of sessions and the PR programs. Only eight trials were at low risk of bias. PR+IMT versus PR We included 22 trials (1446 participants) in this comparison. Based on a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of -1 unit, we did not find an improvement in dyspnea assessed with the Borg scale at submaximal exercise capacity (mean difference (MD) 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.42 to 0.79; 2 RCTs, 202 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).   We also found no improvement in dyspnea assessed with themodified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (mMRC) according to an MCID between -0.5 and -1 unit (MD -0.12, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.14; 2 RCTs, 204 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Pooling evidence for the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) showed an increase of 5.95 meters (95% CI -5.73 to 17.63; 12 RCTs, 1199 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and failed to reach the MCID of 26 meters. In subgroup analysis, we divided the RCTs according to the training duration and mean baseline PImax. The test for subgroup differences was not significant. Trials at low risk of bias (n = 3) demonstrated a larger effect estimate than the overall. The summary effect of the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) revealed an overall total score below the MCID of 4 units (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.93 to 1.20; 7 RCTs, 908 participants; low-certainty evidence).  The summary effect of COPD Assessment Test (CAT) did not show an improvement in the HRQoL (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.80 to 1.06; 2 RCTs, 657 participants; very low-certainty evidence), according to an MCID of -1.6 units.  Pooling the RCTs that reported PImax showed an increase of 11.46 cmH₂O (95% CI 7.42 to 15.50; 17 RCTs, 1329 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) but failed to reach the MCID of 17.2 cmH₂O.  In subgroup analysis, we did not find a difference between different training durations and between studies judged with and without respiratory muscle weakness.  One abstract reported some adverse effects that were considered "minor and self-limited". IMT versus control/sham Thirty-seven RCTs with 1021 participants contributed to our second comparison. There was a trend towards an improvement when Borg was calculated at submaximal exercise capacity (MD -0.94, 95% CI -1.36 to -0.51; 6 RCTs, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Only one trial was at a low risk of bias. Eight studies (nine arms) used the Baseline Dyspnea Index - Transition Dyspnea Index (BDI-TDI). Based on an MCID of +1 unit, they showed an improvement only with the 'total score' of the TDI (MD 2.98, 95% CI 2.07 to 3.89; 8 RCTs, 238 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We did not find a difference between studies classified as with and without respiratory muscle weakness. Only one trial was at low risk of bias. Four studies reported the mMRC, revealing a possible improvement in dyspnea in the IMT group (MD -0.59, 95% CI -0.76 to -0.43; 4 RCTs, 150 participants; low-certainty evidence). Two trials were at low risk of bias. Compared to control/sham, the MD in the 6MWD following IMT was 35.71 (95% CI 25.68 to 45.74; 16 RCTs, 501 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Two studies were at low risk of bias. In subgroup analysis, we did not find a difference between different training durations and between studies judged with and without respiratory muscle weakness.  Six studies reported theSGRQ total score, showing a larger effect in the IMT group (MD -3.85, 95% CI -8.18 to 0.48; 6 RCTs, 182 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The lower limit of the 95% CI exceeded the MCID of -4 units. Only one study was at low risk of bias. There was an improvement in life quality with CAT (MD -2.97, 95% CI -3.85 to -2.10; 2 RCTs, 86 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). One trial was at low risk of bias. Thirty-two RCTs reported PImax, showing an improvement without reaching the MCID (MD 14.57 cmH₂O, 95% CI 9.85 to 19.29; 32 RCTs, 916 participants; low-certainty evidence). In subgroup analysis, we did not find a difference between different training durations and between studies judged with and without respiratory muscle weakness.   None of the included RCTs reported adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

IMT may not improve dyspnea, functional exercise capacity and life quality when associated with PR. However, IMT is likely to improve these outcomes when provided alone. For both interventions, a larger effect in participants with respiratory muscle weakness and with longer training durations is still to be confirmed.

Diaphragm Dysfunction and Rehabilitation Strategy in Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) affects the whole body and causes many extrapulmonary adverse effects, amongst which diaphragm dysfunction is one of the prominent manifestations. Diaphragm dysfunction in patients with COPD is manifested as structural changes, such as diaphragm atrophy, single-fibre dysfunction, sarcomere injury and fibre type transformation, and functional changes such as muscle strength decline, endurance change, diaphragm fatigue, decreased diaphragm mobility, etc. Diaphragm dysfunction directly affects the respiratory efficiency of patients and is one of the important pathological mechanisms leading to progressive exacerbation of COPD and respiratory failure, which is closely related to disease mortality. At present, the possible mechanisms of diaphragm dysfunction in patients with COPD include systemic inflammation, oxidative stress, hyperinflation, chronic hypoxia and malnutrition. However, the specific mechanism of diaphragm dysfunction in COPD is still unclear, which, to some extent, increases the difficulty of treatment and rehabilitation. Therefore, on the basis of the review of changes in the structure and function of COPD diaphragm, the potential mechanism of diaphragm dysfunction in COPD was discussed, the current effective rehabilitation methods were also summarised in this paper. In order to provide direction reference and new ideas for the mechanism research and rehabilitation treatment of diaphragm dysfunction in COPD.

Altered Thoracic Cage Dimensions in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) may cause changes in the shape of the thoracic cage by increasing lung volume and hyperinflation. This study investigated changes in thoracic cage dimensions and related factors in patients with COPD.

Methods

We enrolled 85 patients with COPD (76 males, 9 females; mean age, 70.6±7.1 years) and 30 normal controls. Thoracic cage dimensions were measured using chest computed tomography at levels 3, 6, and 9 of the thoracic spine. We measured the maximal transverse diameter, mid-sagittal anteroposterior (AP) diameter, and maximal AP diameter of the right and left hemithorax.

Results

The average AP diameter was significantly greater in patients with COPD compared with normal controls (13.1±2.8 cm vs. 12.2±1.13 cm, respectively; p=0.001). The ratio of AP/transverse diameter of the thoracic cage was also significantly greater in patients with COPD compared with normal controls (0.66±0.061 vs. 0.61±0.86; p=0.002). In COPD patients, the AP diameter of the thoracic cage was positively correlated with body mass index (BMI) and 6-minute walk test distance (r=0.395, p<0.001 and r=0.238, p=0.028) and negatively correlated with increasing age (r=−0.231, p=0.034). Multiple regression analysis revealed independent correlation only between BMI and increased ratio of AP/transverse diameter of the thoracic cage (p<0.001).

Conclusion

Patients with COPD exhibited an increased AP diameter of the thoracic cage compared with normal controls. BMI was associated with increased AP diameter in these patients.

Low back pain and gastroesophageal reflux in patients with COPD: the disease in the breath

COPD is a worsening condition that leads to a pathologic degeneration of the respiratory system. It represents one of the most important causes of mortality and morbidity in the world, and it is characterized by the presence of associated comorbidity. This article analyzes gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and low back pain (LBP) in patients with COPD and tries to produce anatomo-clinical considerations on the reasons of the presence of these comorbidities. The considerations of the authors are based on the anatomic functions and characteristics of the respiratory diaphragm that are not always considered, from which elements useful to comprehend the symptomatic status of the patient can be deduced, finally improving the therapeutic approach. The information contained in the article can be of help to the clinician and for physiotherapy, and to all health professionals who gravitate around the patient’s care, improving the approach to the diaphragm muscle.

Manual evaluation of the diaphragm muscle

The respiratory diaphragm is the most important muscle for breathing. It contributes to various processes such as expectoration, vomiting, swallowing, urination, and defecation. It facilitates the venous and lymphatic return and helps viscera located above and below the diaphragm to work properly. Its activity is fundamental in the maintenance of posture and body position changes. It can affect the pain perception and emotional state. Many authors reported on diaphragmatic training by using special instruments, whereas only a few studies focused on manual therapy approaches. To the knowledge of the authors, the existing scientific literature does not exhaustively examines the manual evaluation of the diaphragm in its different portions. A complete evaluation of the diaphragm is mandatory for several professional subjects, such as physiotherapists, osteopaths, and chiropractors not only to elaborate a treatment strategy but also to obtain information on the validity of the training performed on the patient. This article aims to describe a strategy of manual evaluation of the diaphragm, with particular attention to anatomical fundamentals, in order to stimulate further research on this less explored field.