Evidence Hub

Multiple breath washout in primary ciliary dyskinesia: a systematic review of the literature

Andreas M. Matthaiou, Alexandra Demetropoulou, Panayiotis Kouis, Kostas Douros, P. Yiallouros, P. Anagnostopoulou

European Respiratory Review, 2025

398 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

Primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD) is a heterogeneous multiorgan genetic disease characterised by motile cilia impairment that primarily affects the respiratory system. Multiple breath washout (MBW) is an emerging pulmonary function test. Its main outcome, the lung clearance index (LCI), is a valuable sensitive measure in obstructive lung disease, especially in cystic fibrosis. The potential value of MBW as a monitoring tool for patients with PCD is not well known. This systematic review summarises all articles published by the end of 2022 reporting MBW data in patients with PCD and compares MBW parameters to spirometry and chest imaging findings. We searched PubMed, Embase and Scopus for original studies with MBW measurements in patients with PCD. 14 studies were included in the analysis with a total number of 398 patients. The mean/median LCI ranged from 7.98 to 11.8, whereas mean/median forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) z-score ranged from −1.98 to −0.5. The LCI was abnormally increased in all studies, whereas only two studies had abnormally decreased FEV1. The LCI also had a stronger correlation with chest computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging results, compared to FEV1. In conclusion, this review shows that the LCI is abnormally high in PCD from the preschool age up to adulthood. MBW appears to be more sensitive than spirometry in identifying pulmonary function impairment at the early stages of disease. These findings support the use of the LCI in daily…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 398 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free