ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Correction
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hughes, J.M.B.
Right arrow Articles by Pride, N.B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hughes, J.M.B.
Right arrow Articles by Pride, N.B.
Eur Respir J 2003; 22:186-187
Copyright ©ERS Journals Ltd 2003


Carbon monoxide transfer coefficient (transfer factor/alveolar volume) in females versus males

J.M.B. Hughes and N.B. Pride

Respiratory Medicine, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, Hammersmith Hospital, London, UK

To the Editors:

The single breath transfer factor of the lung for carbon monoxide (TL,CO) is derived from the multiple of the carbon monoxide transfer coefficient (KCO) and the alveolar volume (VA) during breath holding 1; consequently, the TL,CO is highly dependent on lung size (~VA), and thus is smaller in females for a given height and age. Essentially, the KCO is the rate constant for alveolar carbon monoxide uptake (its units are per second or per minute) and may be expected to be the same in males as in females, as it was in the original description of the technique 2. The published guidelines 3, 4 are not definitive on this point, so we reviewed all studies of reference values for TL,CO and KCO, which have presented data for both males and females.

The European reference values for KCO 3 are derived from the ratio TL,CO predicted/total lung capacity (TLC) predicted. This unusual recommendation arose from correspondence in the ERJ 5, which pointed out that the reference equations previously published in 1983 6 produced values for KCO that were incompatible with those for TL,CO. These European Respiratory Society reference values have been quoted in 118 articles published since 1993 (23 in the ERJ) and have been adopted elsewhere 7. The TL,CO values for females were based on a summary equation 6 derived from only five small studies, the most recent being published in 1979. Fortunately, the available database for TL,CO and KCO has now expanded considerably; seven studies that examined both males and females in their chosen populations have been published between 1980 and 1992 (table 1Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table 1 Published population studies of the carbon monoxide transfer coefficient (KCO)

 
In addition, we believe the use of the TL,CO pred/TLC pred ratio is, itself, unjustified. First, because in general it is undesirable to ratio two reference values obtained from different populations; this is compounded in the present instance, when KCO is inevitably measured in every individual in the actual manoeuvre used to obtain TL,CO. Secondly, although the original recommendation 18 was that the lung volume during breath-holding (~VA) should be measured from the inspired volume preceding the breath hold plus the residual volume (from closed circuit helium dilution), virtually all subsequent population studies (and all those in table 1Go) have substituted the VA derived from the dilution of the inhaled marker gas. This single breath VA, both in the derivation of TL,CO and in the subsequent calculation of TL/VA, is always less than TLC, because the anatomic dead space is subtracted from the VA but not from the TLC, and because gas mixing is often less efficient with a single breath measurement. Hence, using TLC when a single breath VA has been used to calculate TL,CO will lead to a systematic underestimate of predicted KCO.

Table 1Go shows predicted values for KCO at a standard age and height for males and females from 10 studies. Following American Thoracic Society Guidelines 19, we have compared males of 1.75 m stature with females of 1.65 m. When these studies are averaged (without weighting for the different numbers in each study) there is no sex difference for KCO at age 45 yrs, although there is a small (nonsignificant) difference between males and females at 65 yrs. In contrast, from the TL,CO pred/TLC pred ratio 3, the predicted KCO in females at a given age is 5–10% higher than for males, irrespective of whether they are at identical TLC (approximate height for males 1.6 m versus 1.8 m for females) or at identical height (approximate TLC for males 6.1 L versus 5.1 L for females). Table 1Go also shows considerable between-study differences both in mean values and in the age and height coefficients, as is found for most other predicted values for tests of lung function 6. From first principles, a dependence on height would not be expected, but it has been suggested 16 that in taller people the apices of the lungs may be more poorly perfused relative to the mid and lower zones for gravitational reasons; the resulting inhomogeneity in blood flow and blood volume would reduce the measured KCO. All published data on changes with age are derived from cross-sectional studies. The only cohort study of >8 yrs of TL,CO and KCO is that of Watson et al. 20 who followed up, among others, 29 male never-smokers (mean age 37 yrs at start) over a 22-yr period. They found no change in the KCO.

We understand that a joint working party of the American Thoracic Society and the European Respiratory Society is currently reviewing reference values for spirometry, lung volumes and the transfer factor. We hope the carbon monoxide transfer coefficient will not be neglected, since the current recommendations are unsatisfactory. Ideally, values for total lung capacity should be obtained from the same individuals used to obtain reference values for the single breath transfer factor of the lung for carbon monoxide and the carbon monoxide transfer coefficient, so that the effects of poor inflation and/or true differences in total lung capacity at a given height and age can be allowed for 17.

References

  1. Hughes JMB, Pride NB. In defence of the carbon monoxide transfer coefficient KCO (TL/VA). Eur Respir J 2001;17:168–174.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Krogh M. The diffusion of gases through the lungs of man. J Physiol 1915;49:271–296.
  3. Cotes JE, Chinn DJ, Quanjer PH, Roca J, Yernault J-C. Standardization of the measurement of transfer factor (diffusing capacity). Eur Respir J 1993;6:Suppl. 16, 41–52.
  4. American Thoracic Society. Single breath carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (transfer factor), recommendation for a standard technique - 1995 update. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;152:2185–2198.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Love RG, Seaton A, Quanjer PH. About the ECCS summary equations (letters). Eur Respir J 1990;9:489–490.
  6. Quanjer PH. Standardised lung function testing. Report of a Working Party of the European Community for Coal and Steel. Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir 1983;19:Suppl. 5, 45–51.
  7. British Thoracic Society and Association of Respiratory Technicians and Physiologists. Guidelines for the measurement of respiratory function. Respir Med 1994;88:165–194.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. van Ganse WF, Ferris BG, Cotes JE. Cigarette smoking and pulmonary diffusing capacity (transfer factor). Am Rev Respir Dis 1972;105:30–40.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Salorinne Y. Single breath pulmonary diffusing capacity: reference values and application in connective tissue diseases and in various lung diseases. Scand J Respir Dis Suppl 1976;96:1–86.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Crapo RO, Gardner RM. Single breath carbon monoxide diffusing capacity (transfer factor), recommendations for a standard technique. Am Rev Respir Dis 1987;136:299–1307.
  11. Miller A, Thornton JC, Warshaw R, Anderson A, Teirstein AS, Selikoff IJ. Single breath diffusing capacity in a representative sample of the population of Michigan, a large industrial state. Am Rev Respir Dis 1983;127:270–277.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Paoletti P, Viegi G, Pistelli G, et al. Reference equations for the single-breath diffusing capacity: A cross-sectional analysis and effect of body size and age. Am Rev Respir Dis 1985;132:806–813.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Knudson RJ, Kaltenborn WT, Knudson DE, Burrows B. The single breath carbon monoxide diffusing capacity: Reference equations derived from a healthy non-smoking population and effects of hematocrit. Am Rev Respir Dis 1987;135:805–811.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Roca J, Rodriguez-Roisin R, Cobo E, Burgos F, Perez J, Clausen JL. Single breath carbon monoxide diffusing capacity prediction equations from a Mediterranean population. Am Rev Respir Dis 1990;141:1026–1032.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  15. Roberts CM, MacRae KD, Winning AJ, Adams L, Seed WA. Reference values and prediction equations for normal lung function in a non-smoking white urban population. Thorax 1991;46:643–650.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Gulsvik A, Bakke P, Humerfelt S, et al. Single breath transfer factor for carbon monoxide in an asymptomatic population of never smokers. Thorax 1992;47:167–173.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Chinn DY, Cotes JE, Flowers R, Marks A-M, Read JW. Transfer factor (diffusing capacity) standardized for alveolar volume: validation, reference values and application of a new linear model to replace KCO (TL/ VA). Eur Respir J 1996;9:1269–1277.[Abstract]
  18. Ogilvie CM, Forster RE, Blakemore WS, Morton JW. A standardized breath holding technique for the clinical measurement of the diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide. J Clin Invest 1957;36:1–17.
  19. American Thoracic Society. Lung function testing: selection of reference values and interpretative strategies. Am Rev Respir Dis 1991;144:1202–1218.[ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Watson A, Joyce H, Pride NB. Changes in carbon monoxide transfer over 22 years in middle-aged men. Respir Med 2000;94:1103–1108.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]




This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Correction
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hughes, J.M.B.
Right arrow Articles by Pride, N.B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hughes, J.M.B.
Right arrow Articles by Pride, N.B.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS