Literature DB >> 15356550

Dosimeter methacholine challenge: comparison of maximal versus submaximal inhalations.

David C Todd1, Beth E Davis, Thomas S Hurst, Donald W Cockcroft.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Deep inhalation has bronchodilating and bronchoprotective effects, particularly in subjects who are normal or have mild airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR). We have anecdotally observed that the 5 breath to total lung capacity (TLC) dosimeter method reduced the response to methacholine in some subjects with mild AHR.
OBJECTIVE: To compare prospectively submaximal inhalations with TLC inhalations during the dosimeter methacholine challenge.
METHODS: Sixteen subjects with asthma and a methacholine PC 20 <8 mg/mL performed 2 methacholine challenges in random order; the standard dosimeter method was compared with a modified dosimeter challenge in which methacholine inhalations were performed to approximately 50% to 60% below TLC.
RESULTS: The standard methacholine challenge PC 20 was almost twice that obtained with the modified submaximal inhalation method (geometric mean PC 20, 5.2 mg/mL vs 2.8 mg/mL, respectively; P = 0.0216). In the 5 subjects with the mildest AHR, there was a 2.5-fold to 14-fold difference in PC 20 between methods. The standard (full TLC) PC 20 s were falsely negative (>16 mg/mL) in these 5 subjects with current asthma, 4 of whom required inhaled corticosteroids.
CONCLUSION: A submaximal inhalation dosimeter methacholine challenge results in a significantly lower PC 20 compared with the standard 5-breath dosimeter method. This effect is limited to the mildly responsive group, probably because of the bronchoprotective effect of the deep inhalation during the standard method, and results in false-negative tests in some subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15356550     DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.06.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Allergy Clin Immunol        ISSN: 0091-6749            Impact factor:   10.793


  5 in total

Review 1.  Diagnostic and therapeutic value of airway challenges in asthma.

Authors:  Donald W Cockcroft; Beth E Davis
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 4.806

2.  Role of bronchoprovocation tests in identifying exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in a non-athletic population: a pilot study.

Authors:  Jessica H Y Tan; Wui Mei Chew; Therese S Lapperre; Gan Liang Tan; Chian Min Loo; Mariko S Koh
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Airway hyperresponsiveness in asthma: mechanisms, clinical significance, and treatment.

Authors:  John D Brannan; M Diane Lougheed
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2012-12-10       Impact factor: 4.566

4.  Absence of hyper-responsiveness to methacholine after specific bronchial provocation tests in a worker with hydroxyapatite-induced occupational asthma.

Authors:  Young-Hee Nam; Jung-Il Kim; Soo-Jung Um; Soo-Keol Lee; Choon-Hee Son
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Immunol Res       Date:  2011-02-14       Impact factor: 5.764

Review 5.  Comparison of methacholine and mannitol challenges: importance of method of methacholine inhalation.

Authors:  Donald W Cockcroft; Beth E Davis; Christianne M Blais
Journal:  Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol       Date:  2020-02-11       Impact factor: 3.406

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.