| Literature DB >> 30217179 |
Carla Cristina Souza Gomez1,2, Fernando Augusto Lima Marson3,4,5, Maria Fátima Servidoni6,7,8, Antônio Fernando Ribeiro6,7, Maria Ângela Gonçalves Oliveira Ribeiro6,7, Veruska Acioli Lopes Gama9,10,11, Eduardo Tavares Costa9,10, José Dirceu Ribeiro6,7, Francisco Ubaldo Vieira Junior9,10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The sweat test (ST) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis (CF). However, little is known about sweat induction using different types of currents and waves. In this context, our objective was to develop a device to induce sweat and compare the use of continuous constant current (CCC) and continuous pulsed current (CPC) in individuals with CF and healthy controls.Entities:
Keywords: Continuous constant current; Continuous pulsed current; Sinusoidal pulsed current; Sweat test; Triangular pulsed current
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30217179 PMCID: PMC6137935 DOI: 10.1186/s12890-018-0696-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pulm Med ISSN: 1471-2466 Impact factor: 3.317
Fig. 1Study protocol and experimental description. The study enrolled a total of 260 individuals. All the 260 individuals performed the sweat test with continuous constant current at the right arm. Also, from 260 individuals, 205 performed the sweat test with triangular pulsed current and 55 with sinusoidal pulsed current at the left arm. The comparison between continuous constant current and continuous pulsed current was based on related samples. The comparison between sinusoidal constant current and triangular constant current was based on unrelated samples
Fig. 2The comparison between continuous constant current (CCC) and sinusoidal pulsed current (SPC) and triangular pulsed current (TPC) for electrical impedance and sweat weight showed: (i) TPC presented higher electrical impedance values when compared with SPC and CCC; (ii) SPC presented lower electrical impedance and higher sweat weight when compared with CCC. a Arm site where induction was performed using CCC and continuous pulsed current. b Comparison between SPC and TPC for electrical impedance. (SPC) N = 54; 6.14 ± 2.08; 6.23 (2.12 to 11.05); 5.57 to 6.71; (TPC) N = 201; 7.94 ± 3.16; 7.82 (1.94 to 17.76); 7.5 to 8.38. c Comparison between CCC and TPC for electrical impedance. (CCC) N = 197; 8.9 ± 4.8; 8.15 (1.12 to 38.33); 8.23 to 9.60; (TPC) N = 197; 7.97 ± 3.2; 7.83 (1.94 to 17.76); 7.52 to 8.41. d Comparison between CCC and SPC for electrical impedance. (CCC) N = 54; 7.29 ± 2.98; 6.76 (2.95 to 17.11); 6.47 to 8.1; (SPC) N = 54; 6.14 ± 2.08; 6.23 (2.12 to 11.05); 5.57 to 6.71. e Comparison between CCC and SPC for sweat weight. (CCC) N = 55; 146 ± 46.1; 141 (50 to 234); 133.3 to 158.8; (SPC) N = 55; 179 ± 70.2; 176 (46 to 433); 159.7 to 197.1. All p-values were below 0.001. Data are presented as: number of individuals; mean ± standard deviation; median (minimum to maximum); confidence interval for the mean value. Statistical analysis conducted through Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U test of independent samples. Alpha = 0.05. The currents are shown as Ω using the following equation: [Z = VRMS / IRMS (Ω)]; Z = composite impedance (Ω); VRMS = effective voltage measured (volts root mean square); IRMS = effective current measured (current root mean square). Also, the sweat weight is shown as milligrams. Only the associations with p-value < 0.05 was presented as figure
Fig. 3The comparison between female and male participants for the values of electrical impedance and sweat weight, according to the current applied showed: male presented lower electrical impedance [continuous constant current (CCC), triangular pulsed current (TPC)] and higher sweat weight [CCC, sinusoidal pulsed current (SPC), TPC] in relation to female. a Comparison for electrical impedance with CCC. (Female) N = 136; 9.3 ± 4.94; 7.91 (1.12 to 38.33); 8.46 to 10.14; (Male) N = 116; 7.67 ± 3.75; 7.53 (2.3 to 22.29); 6.98 to 8.36. b Comparison for sweat weight with CCC. (Female) N = 141; 155 ± 73; 146 (0 to 425); 142 to 167; (Male) N = 119; 193 ± 104; 186 (3 to 577); 174 to 211. c Comparison for sweat weight with SPC. (Female) N = 30; 153 ± 55; 158 (46 to 267); 132 to 174; (Male) N = 25; 208 ± 74; 209 (97 to 433); 177 to 238. d Comparison for electrical impedance with TPC. (Female) N = 109; 8.57 ± 3.17; 8.16 (2.33 to 17.76); 7.97 to 9.17; (Male) N = 92; 7.2 ± 2.98; 7.18 (1.94 to 16.33); 6.58 to 7.81. e Comparison for sweat weight with TPC. (Female) N = 109; 164 ± 88; 157 (6 to 535); 148 to 181; (Male) N = 92; 206 ± 115; 189 (9 to 699); 182 to 229. All p-values were below 0.003. Data are presented in legend as: number of individuals; mean ± standard deviation; median (minimum to maximum); confidence interval for the mean value; and in figure as median (black line) and 95% confidence interval (green line). Statistical analysis conducted through Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U test of independent samples. Alpha = 0.05. The currents are shown as Ω using the following equation: [Z = VRMS / IRMS (Ω)]; Z = composite impedance (Ω); VRMS = effective voltage measured (volts root mean square); IRMS = effective current measured (current root mean square). Also, the sweat weight is shown as milligrams. There is no impedance figure with sinusoidal pulsed current because the p-value > 0.05 was observed
Comparison of body mass index adjusted by z-score of age for gender and ethnicity for continuous constant current and sinusoidal and triangular continuous pulsed current
| Body mass index group | Gender | ||||
| Female | Male | Total | |||
| Continuous constant current | Eutrophic | 91 | 61 | 152 |
|
| Slenderness + accentuated slendernessa | 7 | 18 | 25 | ||
| Overweight + obesity + serious obesityb | 42 | 39 | 81 | ||
| Total | 140 | 118 | 258 | ||
| Triangular continuous pulsed current | Eutrophic | 78 | 52 | 130 |
|
| Slenderness + accentuated slendernessc | 5 | 15 | 20 | ||
| Overweight + obesity + serious obesityd | 27 | 26 | 53 | ||
| Total | 110 | 93 | 203 | ||
| Body mass index group | Caucasians | p-value | |||
| Yes | No | Total | |||
| Continuous constant current | Eutrophic | 68 | 84 | 152 |
|
| Slenderness + accentuated slendernesse | 14 | 11 | 25 | ||
| Overweight + obesity + serious obesityf | 51 | 30 | 81 | ||
| Total | 133 | 125 | 258 | ||
| Triangular continuous pulsed current | Eutrophic | 52 | 78 | 120 |
|
| Slenderness + accentuated slendernessg | 12 | 8 | 20 | ||
| Overweight + obesity + serious obesityh | 34 | 19 | 53 | ||
| Total | 98 | 105 | 203 | ||
Body mass index was adjusted by z-score (age); OR, odds ratio; 95%CI, confidence interval of 95%. The calculation of odds ratio used the degree of eutrophic as its parameter. Statistical analysis conducted by χ2 test. Alpha = 0.05. Statistically significant data are in bold
aOR = 0.261; 95%CI = 0.103 to 0.662
bOR = 0.722; 95%CI = 0.419 to 1.243
cOR = 0.222; 95%CI = 0.076 to 0.649
dOR = 0.692; 95%CI = 0.364 to 1.317
eOR = 1.572; 95%CI = 0.671 to 3.685
fOR = 2.1; 95%CI = 1.208 to 3.65
gOR = 2.25; 95%CI = 0.861 to 5.882
hOR = 2.684; 95%CI = 1.385 to 5.204
Fig. 4The comparison between Caucasians and non-Caucasians for the values of electrical impedance and body mass index, according to the current applied showed that the body mass index was higher in the group of Caucasians [continuous constant current (CCC) and triangular pulsed current (TPC)], and the sinusoidal pulsed current (SPC) was associated with lower electrical impedance in the group of Caucasians. a Body mass index with the application of CCC. (Non-Caucasians) N = 125; 21.26 ± 5.7; 20.21 (11.06 to 42.29); 20.25 to 22.27; (Caucasians) N = 133; 23.5 ± 6.07; 23.72 (0 to 38.2); 22.46 to 24.55; (p-value = 0.001). b Electrical impedance with the application of SPC. (Non-Caucasians) N = 20; 6.98 ± 2.36; 7.55 (3.19 to 11.05); 5.87 to 8.09; (Caucasians) N = 34; 5.64 ± 1.74; 5.66 (2.12 to 9.62); 5.03 to 6.25. (p-value = 0.037). c Electrical impedance with the application of TPC. (Non-Caucasians) N = 105; 20.6 ± 5.06; 19.57 (11.06 to 34.84); 19.61 to 21.58; (Caucasians) N = 98; 23.14 ± 6.19; 22.9 (0 to 38.2); 21.89 to 24.38. (p-value = 0.001). Data are presented in legend as: number of individuals; mean ± standard deviation; median (minimum to maximum); confidence interval for the mean value; confidence interval for the mean value; and in figure as median (black line) and 95% confidence interval (green line). Statistical analysis conducted through Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U test of independent samples. Alpha = 0.05. The currents are shown as Ω using the following equation: [Z = VRMS / IRMS (Ω)]; Z = composite impedance (Ω); VRMS = effective voltage measured (volts root mean square); IRMS = effective current measured (current root mean square). Also, the body mass index is shown as weight (Kg)/height2 (m). Only the associations with p-value < 0.05 was presented as figure
Comparison of number of exams with insufficient sweat weight (below 75 mg) between continuous constant current and sinusoidal and triangular continuous pulsed current
| Continuous constant current | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sweat weight | Sufficient | Insufficient | ||
| Sinusoidal pulsed current | Sufficient | 49 (89.1%) | 3 (5.5%) | 0.655a |
| Insufficient | 2 (3.6%) | 1 (1.8%) | ||
| Triangular pulsed current | Sufficient | 172 (83.9%) | 9 (4.4%) | 0.523b |
| Insufficient | 13 (6.3%) | 11 (5.4%) | ||
| Continuous pulsed current | Sufficient | 221 (85%) | 12 (4.6%) | 0.333c |
| Insufficient | 15 (5.8%) | 12 (4.6%) | ||
Statistical analysis conducted through McNemar’s tests. Alpha = 0.05
aNumber of observed agreements = 50 (90.91%); Number of agreements expected by chance = 48.4 (88.07%); Kappa = 0.238; SE of kappa = 0.232; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = − 0.217 to 0.693; strength of agreement = fair
bNumber of observed agreements = 183 (93.85%); number of agreements expected by chance = 163.9 (84.04%); Kappa = 0.614; SE of kappa = 0.101; 95%CI = 0.416 to 0.813; strength of agreement = good
cNumber of observed agreements = 233 (89.62%); number of agreements expected by chance = 214 (82.3%); Kappa = 0.413; SE of kappa = 0.093; 95%CI = 0.232 to 0.595; strength of agreement = moderate. As shown in the table, the minor prevalence of insufficient sweat weight occurred for sinusoidal pulsed current (1.8%)
Comparison of sweat test result between continuous constant current and sinusoidal and triangular continuous pulsed current
| Sweat test result | Continuous constant current | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cystic fibrosis | Borderline | Normal | |||
| Sinusoidal pulsed current | Cystic fibrosis | 4 | 1 | 0 |
|
| Borderline | 0 | 16 | 1 | ||
| Normal | 1 | 11 | 15 | ||
| Triangular pulsed current | Cystic fibrosis | 14 | 5 | 0 | 0.423b |
| Borderline | 6 | 49 | 12 | ||
| Normal | 0 | 16 | 62 | ||
| Continuous pulsed current | Cystic fibrosis | 18 | 6 | 0 |
|
| Borderline | 6 | 65 | 13 | ||
| Normal | 1 | 27 | 77 | ||
Statistical analysis conducted through Wilcoxon signed-rank test (ordinal data). Alpha = 0.05
aNumber of observed agreements = 35 (71.43%); number of agreements expected by chance = 19 (38.86%); Kappa = 0.533; SE of kappa = 0.101; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = 0.335 to 0.73; strength of agreement = moderate; weighted Kappa = 0.563; strength of agreement = moderate
bNumber of observed agreements = 125 (76.22%); number of agreements expected by chance = 66.1 (40.31%); Kappa = 0.602; SE of kappa = 0.056; 95%CI = 0.492 to 0.711; strength of agreement = good; weighted Kappa = 0.664; strength of agreement = good
cNumber of observed agreements = 160 (75.12%); number of agreements expected by chance = 85.8 (40.3%); Kappa = 0.583; SE of kappa = 0.05; 95%CI = 0.485 to 0.681; strength of agreement = moderate; weighted Kappa = 0.639; strength of agreement = good. Statistically significant data are in bold. Additional analysis is shown as Fig. 7
Individuals included in the study who presented different results in the cystic fibrosis (CF) classification according to the chloride dose
The colors indicate the changes in the cystic fibrosis diagnosis classification, according to the chloride dose. The table also shows the obtained sweat weight value, which is associated with the chloride dilution in the amount of sweat collected and may change the sweat test result. The sweat test is defined in mmol/L. The sweat weight is defined in mg. Using different currents, we achieved different results in the classification of the sweat test, mainly, considering the borderline value. Also, in the present study, we included only individuals with clinical suspicion of cystic fibrosis, but sometimes, without a close diagnosis (absence of two CFTR mutations and/or two sweat tests ≥ 60 mmol/L). In this context, we found a lot of variability that could be a reflex of the patient enrolled in the studied sample. Finally, all the currents used to induce sweating showed a close capacity to induce the sweat weight above 75 mg
Comparison of sweat weight values (mg) between pulsed current and continuous current, considering the sweat test classification according to the chloride dose
| Continuous pulsed current | Continuous constant current | N | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-cystic fibrosis | 108 | Cystic fibrosis | 80 | 1 | – |
| Borderline | 175 ± 46 | Non-cystic fibrosis | 214 ± 72 | 13 |
|
| 168 (122 to 284) | 212 (142 to 426) | ||||
| Cystic fibrosis | 101 ± 15 | Borderline | 151 ± 87 | 5 | 0.138 |
| 102 (84 to 122) | 128 (89 to 301) | ||||
| Non-cystic fibrosis | 215 ± 90 | Borderline | 154 ± 46 | 27 |
|
| 199 (102 to 535) | 146 (89 to 292) | ||||
| Borderline | 181 ± 62 | Cystic fibrosis | 141 ± 36 | 6 | 0.075 |
| 182 (111 to 269) | 143 (101 to 20) | ||||
Statistical analysis conducted through Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Statistically significant data are in bold. N, number of individuals included in each category – It does not reflect the number of individuals included in the performed experiments. Data are presented in table as: number of individuals; mean ± standard deviation; median (minimum to maximum), except for the first line where the absolute value is shown
Comparison of sweat weight values (mg) between pulsed current and continuous current, considering if an increase or reduction was observed in chloride concentration between pulsed current and continuous current
| Continuous pulsed current | Continuous constant current | N | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reduction of chloride concentration was observed from continuous pulsed current to continuous constant currenta | 154 ± 52 | 197 ± 80 | 18 |
|
| 140 (84 to 284) | 0.188 (89 to 426) | |||
| Increase of chloride concentration was observed from continuous pulsed current to continuous constant currentb | 207 ± 85 | 149 ± 45 | 34 |
|
| 184 (102 to 535) | 143 (80 to 292) |
Statistical analysis conducted through Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Statistically significant data are in bold
adata presented in Table 4 in orange and red
bdata presented in Table 4 in blue, green, and yellow. The obtained sweat weight was associated with chloride concentration and may change the sweat test result because the amount of sweat collected could be cause in a dilution of the chloride in the own sweat. Statistically significant data are in bold. Data are presented in table as: number of individuals; mean ± standard deviation; median (minimum to maximum)
Fig. 5Difference between sweat weight achieved from continuous pulsed current (sinusoidal versus triangular) in relation to continuous constant current showed a higher amount of sweat weight in sinusoidal pulsed current. p-value = 0.02. (Sinusoidal pulsed current) N = 49; 34.63 ± 54.02; 28 (− 58 to 231); 19.12 to 50.15; (Triangular pulsed current) N = 180; − 0.96 ± 85.99; 1 (− 364 to 434); − 13.6 to 11.69. Data are presented in legend as: number of individuals; mean ± standard deviation; median (minimum to maximum); confidence interval for the mean value; and in figure as median (black line) and 95% confidence interval (green line). Statistical analysis conducted through Mann-Whitney U test of independent samples. Alpha = 0.05. The sweat weight is shown as milligrams
Fig. 6Spearman’s coefficient of Rank correlation (Rho) between chloride values achieved in the sweat test (mmol/L) and sweat weight (mg) showed there was a positive correlation between sweat chloride values and sweat weight. a All samples: Sample size = 460 (sweat weight below of 75 mg were excluded). Rho = − 0.482; 95% confidence interval for Rho = − 0.549 to − 0.409. p-value < 0.0001. CCC-CF = 26/460 (5.7%); CCC-borderline = 108/460 (23.5%); CCC-health = 97/460 (21.1%); SPC-CF = 5/460 (1.1%); SPC-borderline = 19/460 (4.1%); SPC-health = 28/460 (6.1%); TPC-CF = 21/460 (4.6%); TPC-borderline = 75/460 (16.3%); TPC-health = 81/460 (17.6%). b CCC. Sample size = 231. Rho = − 0.508; 95% confidence interval for Rho = − 0.598 to − 0.406. CCC-CF = 26/231 (11.26%); CCC-borderline = 108/231 (46.75%); CCC-health = 97/231 (41.99%). p-value < 0.0001. c SPC. Sample size = 52. Rho = − 0.361; 95% confidence interval for Rho = − 0.577 to − 0.098. SPC-CF = 5/52 (9.62%); SPC-borderline = 19/52 (36.54%); SPC-health = 28/52 (53.85%). p-value = 0.0086. d TPC. Sample size = 177. Rho = − 0.470; 95% confidence interval for Rho = − 0.577 to − 0.346. TPC-CF = 21/177 (11.86%); TPC-borderline = 75/177 (42.76%); TPC-health = 81/177 (45.76%). p-value < 0.0001. CCC, continuous constant current; SPC, sinusoidal pulsed current; TPC, triangular pulsed current; CF, cystic fibrosis. Chloride values (mmol/L): (i) CF – ≥ 60 mmol/L; (ii) borderline – between ≥ 30 to < 60 mmol/L; (iii) health – > 30 mmol/L. The chloride concentration is shown as milliequivalent by liter (mmol/L). Also, the sweat weight is shown as milligrams
Fig. 7Bland and Altman plot considering the agreement between the sweat chloride values achieved from continuous pulsed current and continuous constant current. a Sweat chloride values achieved from continuous pulsed current and continuous constant current – R = 0.062; R2 = 0.004; p-value = 0.368; Bias = 1.806; ULA = 23.386; LLA = − 19.774. b Sweat chloride values achieved from sinusoidal pulsed current and continuous constant current – R = 0.027; R2 = 0.001; p-value = 0.855; Bias = 4.891; ULA = 22.502; LLA = − 12.72. c Sweat chloride values achieved from triangular pulsed current and continuous constant current – R = 0.074; R2 = 0.005; p-value = 0.349; Bias = 0.879; ULA = 23.254; LLA = − 21.496. ULA, upper limit of agreement; LLA, lower limit of agreement. The chloride concentration is shown as milliequivalent by liter (mmol/L). The statistical analysis was done with simple linear regression. Alpha = 0.05