The aim of the study was to correlate computed tomographic (CT) scoring systems for pulmonary sarcoidosis with cardiopulmonary exercise testing and evaluate which scoring system provides the most reliable information for assessing disease severity and predicting impairment of gas exchange during exercise.
The institutional review board approved this retrospective study. All 62 patients underwent thin-section CT, pulmonary function tests, and cardiopulmonary exercise test. Two observers scored CT images according to scoring systems published by Remy-Jardin and colleagues. Spearman rank correlation coefficients were calculated between CT patterns and pulmonary functional impairment parameters, and multiple regression analyses were performed to evaluate which CT abnormalities were significantly associated with pulmonary functional impairment parameters.
Regardless of scoring system, PaO2max was significantly associated with the subscores of ground-glass opacity, linear opacity, and total CT scores. Multiple regression analyses showed that subscores of ground-glass and linear opacity in the Leung scoring system appeared to explain a significant amount of variance in functional parameters at rest and at maximal exercise.
CT findings, particularly ground-glass opacity and linear abnormalities, can explain a significant amount of variance in cardiopulmonary exercise parameters. This suggests that CT-based scoring systems are valid measures of disease severity in sarcoidosis.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 March 2016.
All research outputs
#15,983,785
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thoracic Imaging
#291
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,766
of 312,601 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thoracic Imaging
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,601 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.
