The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover Study

Abstract Background With the development and market launch of several new domestic lung diffusing capacity testing instruments, the clinical reliability of the MeHow MeAir 9000 spirometer, featuring a novel turning valve structure, needs to be validated. Objective To evaluate the clinical reliabilit...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Shihua Yao, Tuping Fu, Kuiqing Lin, Zhongping Wu, Shubing Chen, Liping Zhong, Beilan Shen, Yanqing Xie, Jiaying An, Xudong Wang, Wenting Liu, Xinxin Yu, Jinping Zheng, Yi Gao
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-05-01
Series:BMC Pulmonary Medicine
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-025-03571-7
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849312171683479552
author Shihua Yao
Tuping Fu
Kuiqing Lin
Zhongping Wu
Shubing Chen
Liping Zhong
Beilan Shen
Yanqing Xie
Jiaying An
Xudong Wang
Wenting Liu
Xinxin Yu
Jinping Zheng
Yi Gao
author_facet Shihua Yao
Tuping Fu
Kuiqing Lin
Zhongping Wu
Shubing Chen
Liping Zhong
Beilan Shen
Yanqing Xie
Jiaying An
Xudong Wang
Wenting Liu
Xinxin Yu
Jinping Zheng
Yi Gao
author_sort Shihua Yao
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background With the development and market launch of several new domestic lung diffusing capacity testing instruments, the clinical reliability of the MeHow MeAir 9000 spirometer, featuring a novel turning valve structure, needs to be validated. Objective To evaluate the clinical reliability of lung diffusing capacity measurements using the MeHow MeAir 9000 spirometer. Methods This study included 166 participants: 30 healthy individuals, 68 with interstitial lung disease (ILD), and 68 with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Using a crossover design, participants underwent lung diffusing capacity tests with both the MeHow MeAir 9000 and Jaeger MasterScreen Diffusion spirometers, following the 2017 ERS/ATS standards. The primary indicator was the diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (D LCO), with the diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide as a percentage of the predicted value (D LCO %pred) as the main categorical indicator. Secondary indicators included D LCO to alveolar volume ratio (D LCO / V A), alveolar volume (V A), inspired volume (V I), breath-hold time (tBH), fractional concentration of inhaled carbon monoxide (F ICO), fractional concentration of inhaled methane (F ICH4), fractional concentration of carbon monoxide in the alveolar space (F ACO), and fractional concentration of methane in the alveolar space (F ACH4). Consistency analysis was performed on the measurements and the classification of lung diffusing capacity impairment severity from both instruments. Additionally, scatter plots and coefficient of variation (CV%) for inhaled carbon monoxide (CO) and methane (CH4) concentrations were analyzed, along with simulator (Hans Rudolph, Kansas City, MO) test results. Results D LCO ‘s Bland-Altman plot showed 95.0% of data points within the 95% CI, with a CCC of 0.988. In the D LCO %pred classification, the ICCs for the ILD group and the COPD group were 0.940 and 0.975, respectively, while the ICC for the healthy subject group was 0.931. These results indicate good consistency for the primary outcome measures. Secondary indicators had varying CCCs, indicating fair to poor consistency (P < 0.05). Scatter plots and CV% for inhaled CO and CH4 concentrations suggested better stability of MeAir over MasterScreen. Simulator test results showed MeAir had a CO error range of -3.80% to -1.00% and CH4 error range of -0.50–1.00%, while MasterScreen had a CO error range of -2.53–0.00% and CH4 error range of -1.83% to -0.63%, indicating superior CO detection by MasterScreen and better CH4 detection by MeAir. Conclusion The MeHow MeAir 9000 spirometer provides high accuracy measurements of lung diffusing capacity and reliable assessment of the severity of diffusing capacity impairment, making it suitable for clinical use. Clinical trial number Not applicable.
format Article
id doaj-art-52f5909ec0884e10a8c56ce2cd34eaa4
institution Kabale University
issn 1471-2466
language English
publishDate 2025-05-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Pulmonary Medicine
spelling doaj-art-52f5909ec0884e10a8c56ce2cd34eaa42025-08-20T03:53:08ZengBMCBMC Pulmonary Medicine1471-24662025-05-0125111110.1186/s12890-025-03571-7The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover StudyShihua Yao0Tuping Fu1Kuiqing Lin2Zhongping Wu3Shubing Chen4Liping Zhong5Beilan Shen6Yanqing Xie7Jiaying An8Xudong Wang9Wenting Liu10Xinxin Yu11Jinping Zheng12Yi Gao13National Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversitySchool of Biomedical Engineering, Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityNational Clinical Research Center for Respiratory Disease, State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Institute of Respiratory Health, The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical UniversityAbstract Background With the development and market launch of several new domestic lung diffusing capacity testing instruments, the clinical reliability of the MeHow MeAir 9000 spirometer, featuring a novel turning valve structure, needs to be validated. Objective To evaluate the clinical reliability of lung diffusing capacity measurements using the MeHow MeAir 9000 spirometer. Methods This study included 166 participants: 30 healthy individuals, 68 with interstitial lung disease (ILD), and 68 with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Using a crossover design, participants underwent lung diffusing capacity tests with both the MeHow MeAir 9000 and Jaeger MasterScreen Diffusion spirometers, following the 2017 ERS/ATS standards. The primary indicator was the diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (D LCO), with the diffusion capacity of carbon monoxide as a percentage of the predicted value (D LCO %pred) as the main categorical indicator. Secondary indicators included D LCO to alveolar volume ratio (D LCO / V A), alveolar volume (V A), inspired volume (V I), breath-hold time (tBH), fractional concentration of inhaled carbon monoxide (F ICO), fractional concentration of inhaled methane (F ICH4), fractional concentration of carbon monoxide in the alveolar space (F ACO), and fractional concentration of methane in the alveolar space (F ACH4). Consistency analysis was performed on the measurements and the classification of lung diffusing capacity impairment severity from both instruments. Additionally, scatter plots and coefficient of variation (CV%) for inhaled carbon monoxide (CO) and methane (CH4) concentrations were analyzed, along with simulator (Hans Rudolph, Kansas City, MO) test results. Results D LCO ‘s Bland-Altman plot showed 95.0% of data points within the 95% CI, with a CCC of 0.988. In the D LCO %pred classification, the ICCs for the ILD group and the COPD group were 0.940 and 0.975, respectively, while the ICC for the healthy subject group was 0.931. These results indicate good consistency for the primary outcome measures. Secondary indicators had varying CCCs, indicating fair to poor consistency (P < 0.05). Scatter plots and CV% for inhaled CO and CH4 concentrations suggested better stability of MeAir over MasterScreen. Simulator test results showed MeAir had a CO error range of -3.80% to -1.00% and CH4 error range of -0.50–1.00%, while MasterScreen had a CO error range of -2.53–0.00% and CH4 error range of -1.83% to -0.63%, indicating superior CO detection by MasterScreen and better CH4 detection by MeAir. Conclusion The MeHow MeAir 9000 spirometer provides high accuracy measurements of lung diffusing capacity and reliable assessment of the severity of diffusing capacity impairment, making it suitable for clinical use. Clinical trial number Not applicable.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-025-03571-7Pulmonary diffusion functionD LCOD LCO %predMeasurement accuracyDegree of pulmonary dispersion dysfunctionNovel structure
spellingShingle Shihua Yao
Tuping Fu
Kuiqing Lin
Zhongping Wu
Shubing Chen
Liping Zhong
Beilan Shen
Yanqing Xie
Jiaying An
Xudong Wang
Wenting Liu
Xinxin Yu
Jinping Zheng
Yi Gao
The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover Study
BMC Pulmonary Medicine
Pulmonary diffusion function
D LCO
D LCO %pred
Measurement accuracy
Degree of pulmonary dispersion dysfunction
Novel structure
title The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover Study
title_full The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover Study
title_fullStr The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover Study
title_full_unstemmed The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover Study
title_short The Reliability of a Novel Structured Testing Device for Single-breath Lung Carbon Monoxide Uptake: A Randomized Comparison Crossover Study
title_sort reliability of a novel structured testing device for single breath lung carbon monoxide uptake a randomized comparison crossover study
topic Pulmonary diffusion function
D LCO
D LCO %pred
Measurement accuracy
Degree of pulmonary dispersion dysfunction
Novel structure
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-025-03571-7
work_keys_str_mv AT shihuayao thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT tupingfu thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT kuiqinglin thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT zhongpingwu thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT shubingchen thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT lipingzhong thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT beilanshen thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT yanqingxie thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT jiayingan thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT xudongwang thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT wentingliu thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT xinxinyu thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT jinpingzheng thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT yigao thereliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT shihuayao reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT tupingfu reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT kuiqinglin reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT zhongpingwu reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT shubingchen reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT lipingzhong reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT beilanshen reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT yanqingxie reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT jiayingan reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT xudongwang reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT wentingliu reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT xinxinyu reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT jinpingzheng reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy
AT yigao reliabilityofanovelstructuredtestingdeviceforsinglebreathlungcarbonmonoxideuptakearandomizedcomparisoncrossoverstudy