Dongru Du, Sike He, Jiangyue Qin, Hao Wang, Lijuan Gao, Mei Chen, Xiaohua Li, Zhenni Chen, Fengming Luo, Yongchun Shen
{"title":"Diagnostic performance of FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub> in detecting airway obstruction and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Dongru Du, Sike He, Jiangyue Qin, Hao Wang, Lijuan Gao, Mei Chen, Xiaohua Li, Zhenni Chen, Fengming Luo, Yongchun Shen","doi":"10.1177/14799731261431251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundAlthough the postbronchodilator FEV<sub>1</sub>/FVC is the gold standard for diagnosing COPD, it is not easily obtainable due to various reasons. This study aims to investigate whether FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub> may serve as an easily accessible surrogate for FEV<sub>1</sub>/FVC in detecting airway obstruction and COPD.MethodsEligible articles were screened from PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 was applied for quality assessment. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating curve were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic performance of FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub> in detecting airway obstruction and COPD and to determine the optimal cutoff value. Sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed to explore the source of heterogeneity.ResultsWith 28 eligible articles and 65,744 subjects, the FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub> ratio showed good diagnostic performance in detecting both airway obstruction (sensitivity: 0.87, specificity: 0.94, AUC 0.95) and COPD (sensitivity: 0.83, specificity: 0.88, AUC 0.91). Further analyses of the optimal cutoff value suggested that an FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub><0.72 was the best criterion for detecting airway obstruction (sensitivity: 0.84, specificity: 0.97, AUC 0.96), whereas an FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub><0.74 was the best criterion for detecting COPD (sensitivity: 0.87, specificity: 0.89, AUC 0.93). The results of subgroup analyses and meta-regression suggested that study design and geographical location may affect the heterogeneity of both sensitivity and specificity in detecting airway obstruction and COPD.ConclusionThe FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub> may serve as an easily accessible alternative in detecting airway obstruction and COPD. However, application of FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub> may also be constrained by availability and affordability of devices. Further studies are required to determine the best-suited population for FEV<sub>1</sub>/FEV<sub>6</sub> application.</p>","PeriodicalId":10217,"journal":{"name":"Chronic Respiratory Disease","volume":"23 ","pages":"14799731261431251"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12982862/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chronic Respiratory Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14799731261431251","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BackgroundAlthough the postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC is the gold standard for diagnosing COPD, it is not easily obtainable due to various reasons. This study aims to investigate whether FEV1/FEV6 may serve as an easily accessible surrogate for FEV1/FVC in detecting airway obstruction and COPD.MethodsEligible articles were screened from PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 was applied for quality assessment. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating curve were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic performance of FEV1/FEV6 in detecting airway obstruction and COPD and to determine the optimal cutoff value. Sensitivity analyses, subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed to explore the source of heterogeneity.ResultsWith 28 eligible articles and 65,744 subjects, the FEV1/FEV6 ratio showed good diagnostic performance in detecting both airway obstruction (sensitivity: 0.87, specificity: 0.94, AUC 0.95) and COPD (sensitivity: 0.83, specificity: 0.88, AUC 0.91). Further analyses of the optimal cutoff value suggested that an FEV1/FEV6<0.72 was the best criterion for detecting airway obstruction (sensitivity: 0.84, specificity: 0.97, AUC 0.96), whereas an FEV1/FEV6<0.74 was the best criterion for detecting COPD (sensitivity: 0.87, specificity: 0.89, AUC 0.93). The results of subgroup analyses and meta-regression suggested that study design and geographical location may affect the heterogeneity of both sensitivity and specificity in detecting airway obstruction and COPD.ConclusionThe FEV1/FEV6 may serve as an easily accessible alternative in detecting airway obstruction and COPD. However, application of FEV1/FEV6 may also be constrained by availability and affordability of devices. Further studies are required to determine the best-suited population for FEV1/FEV6 application.
虽然支气管扩张剂后FEV1/FVC是诊断COPD的金标准,但由于各种原因,该指标不易获得。本研究旨在探讨FEV1/FEV6是否可以作为FEV1/FVC检测气道阻塞和COPD的简便替代指标。方法从PubMed、Web of Science和Scopus中筛选符合条件的文章。质量评价采用诊断准确性研究质量评价-2。计算综合受试者工作曲线的敏感性、特异性和曲线下面积(AUC),评价FEV1/FEV6在检测气道阻塞和COPD中的诊断价值,确定最佳临界值。采用敏感性分析、亚组分析和元回归分析探讨异质性的来源。结果28篇符合条件的文章,65,744名受试者,FEV1/FEV6比值在检测气道阻塞(敏感性:0.87,特异性:0.94,AUC 0.95)和COPD(敏感性:0.83,特异性:0.88,AUC 0.91)方面均表现出良好的诊断效果。对最佳临界值的进一步分析表明,FEV1/FEV61/FEV61/FEV6可作为检测气道阻塞和COPD的简便替代方法。然而,FEV1/FEV6的应用也可能受到设备可用性和可负担性的限制。需要进一步的研究来确定最适合FEV1/FEV6应用的人群。
期刊介绍:
Chronic Respiratory Disease is a peer-reviewed, open access, scholarly journal, created in response to the rising incidence of chronic respiratory diseases worldwide. It publishes high quality research papers and original articles that have immediate relevance to clinical practice and its multi-disciplinary perspective reflects the nature of modern treatment. The journal provides a high quality, multi-disciplinary focus for the publication of original papers, reviews and commentary in the broad area of chronic respiratory disease, particularly its treatment and management.