Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Journal club
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Interpreting pulmonary function tests

J.M.B. Hughes
Breathe 2009 6: 102-110; DOI: 10.1183/18106838.0602.102
J.M.B. Hughes
National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College School of Medicine, Hammersmith Hospital Campus, London, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Educational aims

  1. To elucidate the purpose of pulmonary function tests (PFTs).

  2. To describe a pathway (algorithm) for interpreting PFTs, in a diagnostic sense, from measurements of spirometry (forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1)) and forced vital capacity (FVC)), lung volume (total lung capacity (TLC)) and gas transfer and coefficient (transfer factor for the lung for carbon monoxide (TL,CO) and transfer coefficient of the lung for carbon monoxide (KCO)).

Summary PFTs are quantitative (for assessment) as well as qualitative (for diagnosis). The assessment aspect asks “are the results normal?”, “how abnormal?”, “has there been a significant change post–bronchodilator, or since the last measurement?”, “can this patient withstand a pneumonectomy?”, etc. The qualitative aspect looks at a portfolio of results (spirometry, lung volumes, gas transfer and muscle pressures) and makes a physiological diagnosis of 1) airflow obstruction: a) intrathoracic or extrathoracic, b) with or without alveolar damage; or 2) restriction: a) intrapulmonary, b) extrapulmonary — chest wall/pleura or neuromuscular. The physiological diagnosis may or may not support the provisional clinical diagnosis as given on the Pulmonary Function Request Form. Interpretation starts with the distinction between obstructive and restrictive disease, based primarily on TLC and the FEV1, the FVC and the FEV1/FVC ratio. The transfer factor and coefficient (TL,CO and KCO) add useful information regarding alveolar damage, pulmonary microvascular pathology, decreased alveolar expansion (neuromuscular disease) and discrete loss of units. A high KCO should prompt measurement of maximal inspiratory (PI,max) and expiratory (PE,max) pressures. Special tests have been developed recently to detect bronchiolar disease (multi–breath nitrogen washout with slope analysis). Exercise testing focuses more on assessment and prognosis than on diagnosis.

  • ©ERS 2009
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 6 Issue 2 Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Interpreting pulmonary function tests
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Interpreting pulmonary function tests
J.M.B. Hughes
Breathe Dec 2009, 6 (2) 102-110; DOI: 10.1183/18106838.0602.102

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Interpreting pulmonary function tests
J.M.B. Hughes
Breathe Dec 2009, 6 (2) 102-110; DOI: 10.1183/18106838.0602.102
Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Epidemiology, occupational and environmental lung disease
  • Mechanisms of lung disease
  • Respiratory clinical practice
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • A clinicians’ review of the respiratory microbiome
  • The problems of cohort studies
  • Breathing exercises for asthma
Show more Review

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About Breathe

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Intructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN: 1810-6838
Online ISSN: 2073-4735

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society