The diaphragm is the main muscle of respiration, acting continuously and uninterruptedly to sustain the task of breathing. Diaphragmatic dysfunction can occur secondary to numerous pathological conditions and is usually underdiagnosed in clinical practice because of its nonspecific presentation. Although several techniques have been used in evaluating diaphragmatic function, the diagnosis of diaphragmatic dysfunction is still problematic. Diaphragmatic ultrasound has gained importance because of its many advantages, including the fact that it is noninvasive, does not expose patients to radiation, is widely available, provides immediate results, is highly accurate, and is repeatable at the bedside. Various authors have described ultrasound techniques to assess diaphragmatic excursion and diaphragm thickening in the zone of apposition. Recent studies have proposed standardization of the methods. This article reviews the usefulness of ultrasound for the evaluation of diaphragmatic function, addressing the details of the technique, the main findings, and the clinical applications.

Background: Fibrotic interstitial lung disease (FILD) patients are typically dyspneic and exercise-intolerant with consequent impairment of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Respiratory muscle dysfunction is among the underlying mechanisms of dyspnea and exercise intolerance in FILD but may be difficult to diagnose. Using ultrasound, we compared diaphragmatic mobility and thickening in FILD cases and healthy controls and correlated these findings with dyspnea, exercise tolerance, HRQoL and lung function. Methods: We measured diaphragmatic mobility and thickness during quiet (QB) and deep breathing (DB) and calculated thickening fraction (TF) in 30 FILD cases and 30 healthy controls. We correlated FILD cases’ diaphragmatic findings with dyspnea, exercise tolerance (six-minute walk test), lung function and HRQoL (St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire). Results: Diaphragmatic mobility was similar between groups during QB but was lower in FILD cases during DB when compared to healthy controls (3.99 cm vs 7.02 cm; p < 0.01). FILD cases showed higher diaphragm thickness during QB but TF was lower in FILD when compared to healthy controls (70% vs 188%, p < 0.01). During DB, diaphragmatic mobility and thickness correlated with lung function, exercise tolerance and HRQoL, but inversely correlated with dyspnea. Most FILD cases (70%) presented reduced TF, and these patients had higher dyspnea and exercise desaturation, lower HRQoL and lung function. Conclusion: Compared to healthy controls, FILD cases present with lower diaphragmatic mobility and thickening during DB that correlate to increased dyspnea, decreased exercise tolerance, worse HRQoL and worse lung function. FILD cases with reduced diaphragmatic thickening are more dyspneic and exercise-intolerant, have lower HRQoL and lung function.

Most patients with unilateral diaphragm paralysis (UDP) have unexplained dyspnea, exercise limitations, and reduction in inspiratory muscle capacity. We aimed to evaluate the generation of pressure in each hemidiaphragm separately and its contribution to overall inspiratory strength. Twenty-seven patients, 9 in right paralysis group (RP) and 18 in left paralysis group (LP), with forced vital capacity (FVC) < 80% pred, and 20 healthy controls (CG), with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) > 80% pred and FVC > 80% pred, were evaluated for lung function, maximal inspiratory (MIP) and expiratory (MEP) pressure measurements, diaphragm ultrasound, and transdiaphragmatic pressure during magnetic phrenic nerve stimulation (Pdi_Tw). RP and LP had significant inspiratory muscle weakness compared to controls, detected by MIP (− 57.4 ± 16.9 for RP; − 67.1 ± 28.5 for LP and − 103.1 ± 30.4 cmH₂O for CG) and also by Pdi_TW (5.7 ± 4 for RP; 4.8 ± 2.3 for LP and 15.3 ± 5.7 cmH₂O for CG). The Pdi_Tw was reduced even when the non-paralyzed hemidiaphragm was stimulated, mainly due to the low contribution of gastric pressure (around 30%), regardless of whether the paralysis was in the right or left hemidiaphragm. On the other hand, in CG, esophagic and gastric pressures had similar contribution to the overall Pdi (around 50%). Comparing both paralyzed and non-paralyzed hemidiaphragms, the mobility during quiet and deep breathing, and thickness at functional residual capacity (FRC) and total lung capacity (TLC), were significantly reduced in paralyzed hemidiaphragm. In addition, thickness fraction was extremely diminished when contrasted with the non-paralyzed hemidiaphragm. In symptomatic patients with UDP, global inspiratory strength is reduced not only due to weakness in the paralyzed hemidiaphragm but also to impairment in the pressure generated by the non-paralyzed hemidiaphragm.

Mechanical ventilation (MV) is a life-saving respiratory support therapy, but MV can lead to diaphragm muscle injury (myotrauma) and induce diaphragmatic dysfunction (DD). DD is relevant because it is highly prevalent and associated with significant adverse outcomes, including prolonged ventilation, weaning failures, and mortality. The main mechanisms involved in the occurrence of myotrauma are associated with inadequate MV support in adapting to the patient’s respiratory effort (over- and under-assistance) and as a result of patient-ventilator asynchrony (PVA). The recognition of these mechanisms associated with myotrauma forced the development of myotrauma prevention strategies (MV with diaphragm protection), mainly based on titration of appropriate levels of inspiratory effort (to avoid over- and under-assistance) and to avoid PVA. Protecting the diaphragm during MV therefore requires the use of tools to monitor diaphragmatic effort and detect PVA. Diaphragm ultrasound is a non-invasive technique that can be used to monitor diaphragm function, to assess PVA, and potentially help to define diaphragmatic effort with protective ventilation. This review aims to provide clinicians with an overview of the relevance of DD and the main mechanisms underlying myotrauma, as well as the most current strategies aimed at minimizing the occurrence of myotrauma with special emphasis on the role of ultrasound in monitoring diaphragm function.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of thoracic radiotherapy on respiratory function and exercise capacity in patients with breast cancer. Methods: Breast cancer patients in whom thoracic radiotherapy was indicated after surgical treatment and chemotherapy were submitted to HRCT, respiratory evaluation, and exercise capacity evaluation before radiotherapy and at three months after treatment completion. Respiratory muscle strength testing, measurement of chest wall mobility, and complete pulmonary function testing were performed for respiratory evaluation; cardiopulmonary exercise testing was performed to evaluate exercise capacity. The total radiotherapy dose was 50.4 Gy (1.8 Gy/fraction) to the breast or chest wall, including supraclavicular lymph nodes (SCLN) or not. Dose-volume histograms were calculated for each patient with special attention to the ipsilateral lung volume receiving 25 Gy (V25), in absolute and relative values, and mean lung dose. Results: The study comprised 37 patients. After radiotherapy, significant decreases were observed in respiratory muscle strength, chest wall mobility, exercise capacity, and pulmonary function test results (p < 0.05). DLCO was unchanged. HRCT showed changes related to radiotherapy in 87% of the patients, which was more evident in the patients submitted to SCLN irradiation. V25% significantly correlated with radiation pneumonitis. Conclusions: In our sample of patients with breast cancer, thoracic radiotherapy seemed to have caused significant losses in respiratory and exercise capacity, probably due to chest wall restriction; SCLN irradiation represented an additional risk factor for the development of radiation pneumonitis.