Inhaled Steroids, Sex and Emphysema Index - Clinical Parameters with Impact on the Effectiveness of Valve Implantation in Patients with Severe Emphysema

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Many patients with chronic obstructive lung disease suffer from emphysema. Valve implantation may be a reasonable method in patients presenting advanced emphysema and absent interlobar collateral ventilation (CV). However, other clinical parameters influencing the effectiveness of endoscopic lung volume reduction (ELVR) are not well known. METHODS: COPD patients with advanced emphysema who received valve implantation in 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The following characteristics were collected prior to valve implantation: age, sex, body mass index, presence of allergies, use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), lung function parameters, diffusion capacity, 6-minute walk distance (6-MWD), blood gases, COHb, smoking history, and emphysema index (quantitative multi-detector computed tomography). Three months following valve implantation, lung function parameters, diffusion capacity, 6-MWD and blood gases were measured. In this analysis, we evaluated the impact of these variables on an increase in FEV(1) and 6-MWT as well as a decrease in RV three months after valve implantation. RESULTS: Overall, 77 COPD patients (57% male, mean age 66, mean FEV(1) 32%, mean RV 259%) who underwent valve therapy were enrolled. At 3-month follow-up, patients experienced a mean FEV(1) increase of 0.09 ± 0.21 L, a mean RV decrease of 0.42 ± 1.80 L and a mean improvement of 8.3 ± 57 m in the 6-MWT. Overall, ICS, sex and emphysema index had an impact on the outcome following ELVR: ICS medication was associated with inferior FEV(1) outcome. The higher the emphysema index, the less the RV reduction. Sex was a predictor for change of FEV(1) (%), RV (L), and 6-MWT: male patients seem to benefit less than female patients from valve implantation. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that ICS, emphysema index and sex are clinical parameters that may be associated with inferior outcome following ELVR. Further studies have to confirm these results to improve patient selection and clinical outcome of ELVR.

• Polke, M.
• Brugger, J.
• Rötting, M.
• Polke, N.
• Brock, J.
• Schuler, S.
• Richter, I.
• Eberhardt, R.
• Herth, F. J. F.
• Gompelmann, D.