help button home button
AJRCCM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Magalang, U. J.
Right arrow Articles by Grant, B. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Magalang, U. J.
Right arrow Articles by Grant, B. J.

Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., Vol 151, No. 1, Jan 1995, 98-106.

Determination of gas exchange threshold by nonparametric regression

UJ Magalang and BJ Grant
Department of Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo.

The gas exchange threshold (GET) has been used an an index of anaerobic threshold because it can be measured noninvasively. GET is estimated from a breakpoint in breath by breath values of carbon dioxide uptake (Vco2) and oxygen uptake (Vo2) obtained during a progressive exercise test. Three methods of estimating GET were evaluated: (1) the original V slope method (OVS) using two adjoining standard linear regressions, (2) the modified V slope method (MVS) where the breakpoint is detected by visual inspection, and (3) a new method that we developed with nonparametric regression (NPM) using cubic splines. Simulated data were used because the existence of a breakpoint is known with certainty. Detection accuracy for OVS and MVS never exceeded 63% because of a low specificity. The detection accuracy of NPM ranged between 50 and 89% depending on the amount of noise and abruptness of the threshold, and exceeded that of OVS and MVS at low levels of noise. NPM was significantly more accurate (p < 0.05) than OVS and MVS for detecting GET except with high levels of noise. Both NPM and OVS have similar degrees of numerical accuracy and are superior to the currently used MVS method in this respect. All three methods gave similar results on 20 exercise tests. We conclude from the simulated data that NPM is more accurate than OVS and MVS at detecting GET. NPM can be applied to human data and it provides results that are consistent with OVS and MVS.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proc. Am. Thorac. Soc. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
Copyright © 1995 American Thoracic Society
  Solid Organ Transplant for the Intensivist 2008