Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 90993

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2025 | Month : March | Volume : 19 | Issue : 3 | Page : OC01 - OC04 Full Version

Prediction of Pulmonary Hypertension in Patients with Diffuse Parenchymal Lung Disease using Forced Vital Capacity/ Diffusion Capacity of Lung using Carbon Monoxide Ratio: A Cross-sectional Study


Published: March 1, 2025 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2025/76367.20689
Anubhab Moulik, Jaydip Deb, Sourindra Nath Banerjee, Priyanka Ray, Pulak Kumar Jana, Sukanta Kodali, Saswata Ghosh

1. Postgraduate Trainee, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 2. Professor and Head, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 5. Professor, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 6. Assistant Professor, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. 7. Associate Professor, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Nilratan Sircar Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Anubhab Moulik,
65-H, Moore Avenue, Kolkata-700040, West Bengal, India.
E-mail: moulikanubhab@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Diffuse Parenchymal Lung Disease (DPLD) comprise a heterogeneous group of diseases that occur when an abnormal healing response is induced by injury to the lungs. The diagnosis of DPLD is based on clinical presentation and radiological features. The initial diagnostic work-up includes Pulmonary Function Tests (PFT), such as spirometry and diffusion tests.

Aim: To evaluate the accuracy of the Forced Vital Capacity/Diffusion Capacity of Lung for Carbon Monoxide (FVC/DLCO) ratio in predicting the presence of pulmonary hypertension in patients with DPLD.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted from January 2023 to March 2024 in the Inpatient Department (IPD) and Outpatient Department (OPD) of Nilratan Sircar (NRS) Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata, West Bengal, India. A total of 50 patients underwent High-Resolution Computed Tomography (HRCT) thorax and spirometry with DLCO, along with some other ancillary investigations. The parameters evaluated primarily include a descriptive account of the spirometry values, which were Forced Expiratory Volume in 1 second (FEV1), FVC and DLCO, as well as the 6-Minute Walk Distance (6MWD) for physiological assessment and ECHO 2D for the evaluation of pulmonary hypertension. Simple logistic regression was performed between the FVC/DLCO ratio and the presence or absence of pulmonary hypertension based on ECHO 2D with Doppler as the binary outcome. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve was obtained and the FVC/DLCO cut-off ratio was adjusted to achieve the highest sensitivity for predicting pulmonary hypertension based on this dataset.

Results: Out of 50 patients (30 females and 20 males), the most common HRCT thorax pattern was Usual Interstitial Pneumonia (UIP), observed in 19 patients (38%), followed by Non Specific Interstitial Pneumonia (NSIP) in 11 patients (22%). The single most common DPLD was Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF), with 11 patients (22%), while the most common group was Connective Tissue Disease-related DPLD (CTD-DPLD), comprising 22 patients (44%). An FVC/DLCO ratio of 0.97 was found to have a sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 77%, a Positive Predictive Value (PPV) of 86%, a Negative Predictive Value (NPV) of 70% and a diagnostic accuracy of 80% in predicting pulmonary hypertension.

Conclusion: The FVC/DLCO ratio of 0.97 represents a modality that could aid in the diagnosis of pulmonary hypertension.

Keywords

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, Systemic sclerosis, Usual interstitial pneumonia

The DPLDs are a group of disorders that involve the space between alveolar epithelial and capillary endothelial basement membranes (1). The most important part of the work-up for patients with DPLD is detailed and proper history-taking to identify possible aetiologies, including occupational or drug exposures and signs of conditions like Connective Tissue Diseases (CTDs), sarcoidosis and infection (2). The HRCT of the chest is the gold standard modality for DPLD diagnosis. It provides ten times more resolution than conventional imaging, revealing details that cannot otherwise be visualised (3).

A restrictive pattern is usually seen on spirometry in patients with DPLD (4). The Diffusing Capacity for Carbon Monoxide Single Breath (DLCO-SB) test is used to assess DPLD, as it indicates thickening of the alveolar membrane and diminished total lung volume due to interstitial processes (5). To reduce the frequency of performing HRCT during follow-up of patients with DPLD, attempts have been made to correlate HRCT thorax fibrosis with DLCO-SB in DPLD (6). Among Pulmonary Function Tests (PFTs), DLCO was found to relate better to the extent of disease on HRCT chest scans than spirometry or lung volumes (7). A baseline low DLCO, independent of histopathological diagnosis, was found to predict reduced survival (8). Although the majority of DPLDs are known to produce alveolar inflammation and share common physiological abnormalities, some DPLDs are found to affect the large airways, along with the smaller airways and interstitium and are hence presumed to produce distinctive physiological manifestations (9).

DPLDs are often diagnosed clinico-radiologically and the follow-up of these patients involves repeat imaging, which raises concerns about radiation exposure. Spirometry with DLCO may help to address this issue, as it is radiation-free, easy to perform and can be repeated as needed (10).

PFTs are an easy and helpful tool for screening pulmonary vasculopathy in scleroderma patients. They assist in recognising early pulmonary hypertension, which can subsequently be confirmed with further testing (11). However, pulmonary hypertension remains an important prognostic factor in these patients and it is usually detected using two-dimensional echocardiography with Doppler study. The FVC/DLCO ratio is a novel parameter, albeit one that is still little explored and is primarily used in systemic sclerosis.

This gap in the literature is addressed in this study, which aimed to evaluate the accuracy of the FVC/DLCO ratio in predicting the presence of pulmonary hypertension in patients with DPLD.

Material and Methods

The cross-sectional time-bound study was conducted at NRS Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India, in the respiratory medicine department (IPD and OPD) from January 2023 to March 2024. This study was approved by the IEC (NRSMC/IEC/178/2022). Written informed consent was obtained from every participant. A total of 50 patients diagnosed with DPLD during the study duration were included in the study.

Inclusion criteria: Patients older than 12 years of age with DPLD, either newly or previously diagnosed, who presented with clinical features suggestive of DPLD, such as dry cough, progressive exertional dyspnoea and other symptoms related to the aetiology, as well as radiological evidence on HRCT thorax of different patterns pertaining to DPLDs, were included.

Exclusion criteria: Patients with hepatic, renal, or cardiac co-morbidities that may cause pulmonary venous congestion or affect the pulmonary interstitium, thereby interfering with adequate effort and confounding the results during spirometry with DLCO. Patients recovering from major thoracic, abdominal, head, or ocular surgery. Patients with co-existing neuromuscular diseases and active haemoptysis. Patients with bullous airway diseases evident on HRCT thorax, a likelihood of pneumothorax based on clinical examination and those with significant kyphoscoliosis that may not be attributable to the disease process based on history. Additionally, patients on antitubercular drugs and those experiencing acute exacerbation of DPLD were also excluded from the study.

Study Procedure

Data were collected using case record forms after obtaining informed consent. All patients underwent HRCT thorax and spirometry with DLCO. A general physical examination and history-taking were conducted for all patients, particularly focusing on their smoking history. Some patients underwent serological testing, including Anti-Nuclear Antibody (ANA), ANA profile, Rheumatoid Factor (RF) and anti-Cyclic Citrullinated Peptide (CCP) for CTD-DPLD. Serum Angiotensin Converting Enzyme (ACE), 24-hour urinary calcium and serum calcium were tested in suspected cases of sarcoidosis. For patients with hypersensitivity pneumonitis, a serum hypersensitivity pneumonitis panel was conducted. Bronchoscopy with Broncho-Alveolar Lavage (BAL) fluid analysis was performed for cytology and to rule out infections, including tuberculosis, in some patients. All patients underwent ECHO 2D with Pulmonary Artery Systolic Pressure (PASP) estimation in the department of cardiology. Purposive, non random sampling was performed and patients were selected after being vetted through the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

The parameters studied included a description of the imaging findings on HRCT thorax images and radiological patterns such as UIP, NSIP, organising pneumonia, lymphocytic interstitial pneumonia, etc. Additionally, parameters such as FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC ratio and DLCO were noted. ECHO 2D with Doppler studies, with an emphasis on PASP, was also recorded. The 6MWD values were noted in all patients.

Statistical Analysis

Data were entered into MS Excel and analysed using MS Excel and GraphPad Prism software, version 9. Descriptive statistics, such as age distribution, smoking status, gender representation and the distribution of FEV1, FVC, DLCO and 6MWD values, were calculated using the descriptive statistics functions of MS Excel. The tests used included an unpaired t-test and simple logistic regression. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant for this study. Simple logistic regression was performed between the FVC/DLCO ratio and the presence or absence of pulmonary hypertension, based on ECHO 2D with Doppler, as the binary outcome. The ROC curve was obtained and the FVC/DLCO cut-off ratio was adjusted to achieve the highest sensitivity for predicting pulmonary hypertension based on this dataset.

Results

In this study, of the 50 patients, 20 were male (40%) and the remaining 30 were female (60%). The mean age was 49.22±15.64 years. The most common age group was between 45 and 60 years, with 19 patients (38%) (Table/Fig 1). Out of the total 50 patients, 15 (30%) were ex-smokers or current smokers, while the remaining 35 (70%) were non smokers.

The most common HRCT thorax involvement was honeycombing (21 patients, 42%), followed by predominant reticulation and Ground Glass Opacity (GGO) with subpleural sparing (17 patients, 34%) (Table/Fig 2).

Other patterns included: two cases with bilateral peripheral predominant subpleural consolidation in a broncho-vascular distribution; four cases with peribronchovascular and fissural nodules with upper lobe predominant reticulation; two cases with bilateral multilobar GGO; one case with bizarre-shaped cysts in the lung with bilateral diffuse involvement; one case with lower lobe predominant cystic spaces with para-mediastinal cysts; one case with basal honeycombing and upper lobe predominant emphysema; and one case with cysts superimposed on GGO in a lower lobe predominant distribution with subpleural sparing. The most common overall pattern was the UIP pattern on HRCT thorax (Table/Fig 3).

Other patterns included one case of Combined Pulmonary Fibrosis with Emphysema (CPFE), three cases of cystic DPLD, two cases of diffuse alveolar hemorrhage characterised by bilateral diffuse GGO, two cases of probable UIP, two cases of organising pneumonia characterised by peripheral pleural-based multifocal consolidation and two cases with an unclassifiable pattern. CTD-DPLD was the most common overall diagnosis (22 patients, 44%), followed by IPF (11 patients, 22%) (Table/Fig 4).

The mean DLCO adjusted for IPF patients was 8.5909±4.5302, while in non IPF patients, the mean DLCO adjusted was 13.8513±10.7887.

The difference in means, evaluated using an unpaired t-test with Welch’s correction, was statistically significant (p-value=0.0217). The difference in means between 6MWD was also statistically significant (p-value=0.0028) (Table/Fig 5).

The most common spirometry curve pattern was restrictive (38 patients, 76%), followed by a mixed defect in eight patients (16%). The obstructive pattern was noted in two patients with sarcoidosis and one patient with pulmonary Langerhans cell histiocytosis, while one patient with idiopathic pulmonary haemosiderosis had a normal flow-volume loop (Table/Fig 6).

The difference in means was statistically significant for 6MWD and DLCO parameter, while it was not statistically significant for the FVC/DLCO ratio (Table/Fig 7). No statistically significant difference in mean values was observed between the IPF and non IPF groups in FEV1, FVC values and the FEV1/FVC ratio (Table/Fig 8).

The FVC/DLCO ratio of patients with and without pulmonary hypertension was analysed using a simple logistic regression test.

Since this ratio serves as a screening test, a probability threshold providing the highest sensitivity was chosen. A ratio of 0.97 was determined to predict the presence of pulmonary hypertension, while a value lower than that was used to infer the absence of pulmonary hypertension. Based on this dataset and model, the analysis reached a sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 77%, PPV of 86%, NPV of 70% and diagnostic accuracy of 80% (Table/Fig 9),(Table/Fig 10).

Discussion

The DPLDs are a heterogeneous group of diseases whose incidence increases with age (12). This study was performed to gain insight into the functional status of DPLD patients using spirometry with DLCO, as well as an evaluation of pulmonary hypertension from the FVC/DLCO ratio, if feasible, thus attempting to supplement 2D- ECHO, which is often operator-dependent. The 6MWD was also conducted as part of the physiological assessment and is a valuable tool in assessing prognosis and evaluating the need for pulmonary rehabilitation (13), an often overlooked area in these patients.

In this study, female patients comprised 60% of the sample size, which contrasts with the findings published by Tentu AK et al., in which the majority of patients (72%) were male. A possible explanation for this finding could be a hospital-based selection bias (14). The most common age group in this study was 45-60 years, with 19 patients (38%), which corroborates with Tentu AK et al.’s finding, where the most common age was around 50 years (78%) (14). The most common spirometry loop pattern was restrictive (76%), which was similar to the findings of Balas Z et al., (15).

The most common DPLD in this study was CTD-DPLD, which comprised 22 out of 50 cases, or 44%. This contrasts with the findings of the Indian Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) registry, which observed that the most common ILD was hypersensitivity pneumonitis, followed by CTD-ILD and Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis (IPF) (16). This contrasting finding in present study could be explained by hospital-based bias and the limited sample size used in this study, in contrast to the Indian DPLD registry of 1,084 patients. The prevalence of CTDs was found to be higher in association with DPLD than in the general population (17). The most common DPLD CT involvement was honeycombing with subpleural involvement and GGO with reticulation (38 cases, 76%). Xaubet A et al., described a moderate correlation between abnormalities on HRCT thorax in 39 treated IPF patients and their corresponding DLCO and FVC values (18). There was no statistically significant difference in the mean FEV1, FVC and FEV1/FVC ratio between the IPF and non IPF groups, which could be due to the heterogeneous nature of patients in the groups, sampling bias, non randomisation and the discrepancy in subgroup sample size.

Out of a total of 50 patients, 15 (30%) had exposure to smoking, while the remaining 35 (70%) were never smokers, which contrasts with the findings of Patel S et al., where a smoking proportion of 61% among the study population was reported (19). The difference in 6MWD between patients with pulmonary hypertension and those without corroborated the findings of Andersen CU et al., in which, out of 212 patients, a 6MWD of less than 345 m was independently associated with pulmonary hypertension (20). The FVC/DLCO ratio is a novel parameter and is mostly described for systemic sclerosis DPLD. In this study, an FVC/DLCO ratio of 0.97 predicted pulmonary hypertension as evaluated on ECHO2D, with a sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 77%, a positive predictive value of 86%, a negative predictive value of 70% and a diagnostic accuracy of 80%. This was in contrast to the cut-off of 1.39 as advocated by Eid D et al., (21). However, the latter study only dealt with patients with systemic sclerosis and pulmonary hypertension, while this study included different DPLD patients with and without pulmonary hypertension.

Limitation(s)

The study was conducted at a single centre in a tertiary care hospital, so hospital bias cannot be ruled out. It was carried out in the IPD and OPD of respiratory medicine, which may introduce an element of selection bias. Additionally, since this was a cross-sectional study, it was not possible to assess prognosis.

Conclusion

The most common DPLD encountered in the study was connective tissue disease-associated DPLD (CTD-DPLD), followed by IPF and sarcoidosis, in that order. An FVC/DLCO ratio of 0.97 serves as a good cut-off for predicting pulmonary hypertension in these patients.

Acknowledgement

I am grateful to my parents for their support and my teachers for their constant guidance. I am grateful to my colleagues and my juniors for their unwavering support without whom this work would not have seen the light of day. I am grateful to Dr. Angira Dasgupta madam, pulmonologist at B.R Singh Hospital, Kolkata for igniting the passion for biostatistics in me.

References

1.
American Thoracic Society, European Respiratory Society. American Thoracic Society/European Respiratory Society International Multidisciplinary Consensus Classification of the Idiopathic Interstitial Pneumonias. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002;165:277-304. [crossref][PubMed]
2.
Oldham M, Adegunsoye A, Valenzi E, Lee C, Witt L, Chen L, et al. Characteristics of patients with interstitial pneumonia with autoimmune features. Eur Respir J. 2016;47(6):1767-75. [crossref][PubMed]
3.
Sverzellati N, Desai S. Radiology in diffuse parenchymal lung disease and lung nodules. Eur Respir Rev. 2017;26(144):170049. Available from: https://doi. org/10.1183/160006170049-2017. [crossref][PubMed]
4.
Hieba EG, Shaimaa EE, Dina SS, Noha AO. Diffusion lung capacity for carbon monoxide correlates with HRCT findings in patients with diffuse parenchymal lung disease. Egypt J Bronchol. 2020;14:39. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1186/ s43168-020-00042-x. [crossref]
5.
Riad N, Morshedy N, Shoukri A. Role of pulmonary function tests in screening pulmonary arterial hypertension in scleroderma. Egypt J Bronchol. 2015;9:287-92. [crossref]
6.
Watters LC, King TE, Schwarz MI, Waldron JA, Stanford RE, Cherniack RM. A clinical, radiographic, and physiologic scoring system for the longitudinal assessment of patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1986;133:97-103. [crossref][PubMed]
7.
Wells AU, Hansell DM, Rubens MB, King AD, Cramer D, Black CM, et al. Fibrosing alveolitis in systemic sclerosis: Indices of lung function in relation to extent of disease on computed tomography. Arthritis Rheum. 1997;40(7):1229-36. Epub 1997/07/01. [crossref]
8.
Jegal Y, Kim DS, Shim TS, Lim CM, Do Lee S, Koh Y, et al. Physiology is a stronger predictor of survival than pathology in fibrotic interstitial pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2005;171(6):639-44. Epub 2005/01/11. [crossref][PubMed]
9.
Lama VN, Martinez FJ. Resting and exercise physiology in interstitial lung diseases. Clin Chest Med. 2004;25(3):435-53. v. Epub 2004/08/28. [crossref][PubMed]
10.
Bhattacharyya P, Mukherjee S, Mukherjee A, Paul M, Sengupta S, Dey D, et al. Etiological profile and evaluation of DPLD in real-world: The perceived impression of the ILD treating doctors in India. J Assoc Chest Physicians. 2022;10(2):75-80. Doi: 10.4103/jacp.jacp_5_22. [crossref]
11.
Halasan C, Korzan F, Datta D. Comparison of FVC. FVC/DLCO and TLC/DLCO as an indicator for ILD in patients with Scleroderma. Chest. 2018;154(4):448. [crossref]
12.
Ahmed HG, Alanazi TAS, Anazi HAA, Alfaraj AFA, Alshammary FMF, Alsunidy KA, et al. Prevalence of diffuse parenchymal lung disease (DPLD) and associated fibrosis in Northern Saudi Arabia. Int J Sci Res. 2013;4(5):1380-82.
13.
Holland AE, Spruit MA, Troosters T, Puhan MA, Pepin V, Saey D, et al. An official European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society technical standard: Field walking tests in chronic respiratory disease. Eur Respir J. 2014;44:1428- 46. Doi: 10.1183/09031936.00150314. [crossref][PubMed]
14.
Tentu AK, Singh S, Laxmivandana R, Singh SK. Role of pulmonary function tests in the assessment of lung impairment in patients with diffuse parenchymal lung diseases: Association with Clinicoradiological-histopathological profile. J Clin Diag Res. 2018;12(11):OC06-OC11. [crossref]
15.
Balas Z, Wagh V, Nagaonkar V. Study of spirometry in ILD patients and its correlation with clinical and radiological profile. J Assoc Physicians India. 2022;70(4):11-12. PMID:35443640. [crossref]
16.
Singh S, Collins BF, Sharma BB, Joshi JM, Talwar D, Katiyar S, et al. Interstitial lung disease in India. Results of a prospective registry. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195(6):801-13. [crossref][PubMed]
17.
Gaubitz M. Epidemiology of connective tissue disorders. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45(Suppl 3):iii3-4. Epub 2006/09/22. [crossref][PubMed]
18.
Xaubet A, Agusti C, Luburich P, Roca J, Montón C, Ayuso MC, et al. Pulmonary function tests and CT scan in the management of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1998;158:431-36. [crossref][PubMed]
19.
Patel S, Maulik J, Trivedi A, Patel R. Role of HRCT thorax in Interstitial Lung disease (A Study of 100 patients).Int J Sci Res. 2024;13(6):1892-1901. [crossref]
20.
Andersen CU, Mellemkjær S, Hilberg O, Nielsen-Kudsk JE, Simonsen U, Bendstrup E. Pulmonary hypertension in interstitial lung disease prevalence, prognosis and 6 minute walk test. Respir Med. 2012;106(6):875-82. [crossref][PubMed]
21.
Eid D, Makhlouf HA, Mohamed-Hussein AAR. Evaluation of FVC/DLCO ratio as a predictor for pulmonary hypertension in patients with interstitial lung diseases. European Respiratory Journal. 2017;50:PA861.[crossref]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2025/76367.20689

Date of Submission: Oct 17, 2024
Date of Peer Review: Nov 22, 2024
Date of Acceptance: Jan 22, 2025
Date of Publishing: Mar 01, 2025

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Oct 18, 2024
• Manual Googling: Dec 26, 2024
• iThenticate Software: Jan 20, 2025 (13%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

EMENDATIONS: 8

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com