Cargando…

Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma

BACKGROUND: Asthma can be difficult to diagnose, but bronchial provocation with methacholine, exercise or mannitol is helpful when used to identify bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR), a key feature of the disease. The utility of these tests in subjects with signs and symptoms of asthma but without...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Anderson, Sandra D, Charlton, Brett, Weiler, John M, Nichols, Sara, Spector, Sheldon L, Pearlman, David S
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2644668/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19161635
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1465-9921-10-4
_version_ 1782164743077756928
author Anderson, Sandra D
Charlton, Brett
Weiler, John M
Nichols, Sara
Spector, Sheldon L
Pearlman, David S
author_facet Anderson, Sandra D
Charlton, Brett
Weiler, John M
Nichols, Sara
Spector, Sheldon L
Pearlman, David S
author_sort Anderson, Sandra D
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Asthma can be difficult to diagnose, but bronchial provocation with methacholine, exercise or mannitol is helpful when used to identify bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR), a key feature of the disease. The utility of these tests in subjects with signs and symptoms of asthma but without a clear diagnosis has not been investigated. We investigated the sensitivity and specificity of mannitol to identify exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) as a manifestation of BHR; compared this with methacholine; and compared the sensitivity and specificity of mannitol and methacholine for a clinician diagnosis of asthma. METHODS: 509 people (6–50 yr) were enrolled, 78% were atopic, median FEV(1 )92.5% predicted, and a low NAEPPII asthma score of 1.2. Subjects with symptoms of seasonal allergy were excluded. BHR to exercise was defined as a ≥ 10% fall in FEV(1 )on at least one of two tests, to methacholine a PC(20 )≤ 16 mg/ml and to mannitol a 15% fall in FEV(1 )at ≤ 635 mg or a 10% fall between doses. The clinician diagnosis of asthma was made on examination, history, skin tests, questionnaire and response to exercise but they were blind to the mannitol and methacholine results. RESULTS: Mannitol and methacholine were therapeutically equivalent to identify EIB, a clinician diagnosis of asthma, and prevalence of BHR. The sensitivity/specificity of mannitol to identify EIB was 59%/65% and for methacholine it was 56%/69%. The BHR was mild. Mean EIB % fall in FEV(1 )in subjects positive to exercise was 19%, (SD 9.2), mannitol PD(15 )158 (CI:129,193) mg, and methacholine PC(20 )2.1(CI:1.7, 2.6)mg/ml. The prevalence of BHR was the same: for exercise (43.5%), mannitol (44.8%), and methacholine (41.6%) with a test agreement between 62 & 69%. The sensitivity and specificity for a clinician diagnosis of asthma was 56%/73% for mannitol and 51%/75% for methacholine. The sensitivity increased to 73% and 72% for mannitol and methacholine when two exercise tests were positive. CONCLUSION: In this group with normal FEV(1), mild symptoms, and mild BHR, the sensitivity and specificity for both mannitol and methacholine to identify EIB and a clinician diagnosis of asthma were equivalent, but lower than previously documented in well-defined populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This was a multi-center trial comprising 25 sites across the United States of America. (NCT0025229).
format Text
id pubmed-2644668
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26446682009-02-19 Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma Anderson, Sandra D Charlton, Brett Weiler, John M Nichols, Sara Spector, Sheldon L Pearlman, David S Respir Res Research BACKGROUND: Asthma can be difficult to diagnose, but bronchial provocation with methacholine, exercise or mannitol is helpful when used to identify bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR), a key feature of the disease. The utility of these tests in subjects with signs and symptoms of asthma but without a clear diagnosis has not been investigated. We investigated the sensitivity and specificity of mannitol to identify exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) as a manifestation of BHR; compared this with methacholine; and compared the sensitivity and specificity of mannitol and methacholine for a clinician diagnosis of asthma. METHODS: 509 people (6–50 yr) were enrolled, 78% were atopic, median FEV(1 )92.5% predicted, and a low NAEPPII asthma score of 1.2. Subjects with symptoms of seasonal allergy were excluded. BHR to exercise was defined as a ≥ 10% fall in FEV(1 )on at least one of two tests, to methacholine a PC(20 )≤ 16 mg/ml and to mannitol a 15% fall in FEV(1 )at ≤ 635 mg or a 10% fall between doses. The clinician diagnosis of asthma was made on examination, history, skin tests, questionnaire and response to exercise but they were blind to the mannitol and methacholine results. RESULTS: Mannitol and methacholine were therapeutically equivalent to identify EIB, a clinician diagnosis of asthma, and prevalence of BHR. The sensitivity/specificity of mannitol to identify EIB was 59%/65% and for methacholine it was 56%/69%. The BHR was mild. Mean EIB % fall in FEV(1 )in subjects positive to exercise was 19%, (SD 9.2), mannitol PD(15 )158 (CI:129,193) mg, and methacholine PC(20 )2.1(CI:1.7, 2.6)mg/ml. The prevalence of BHR was the same: for exercise (43.5%), mannitol (44.8%), and methacholine (41.6%) with a test agreement between 62 & 69%. The sensitivity and specificity for a clinician diagnosis of asthma was 56%/73% for mannitol and 51%/75% for methacholine. The sensitivity increased to 73% and 72% for mannitol and methacholine when two exercise tests were positive. CONCLUSION: In this group with normal FEV(1), mild symptoms, and mild BHR, the sensitivity and specificity for both mannitol and methacholine to identify EIB and a clinician diagnosis of asthma were equivalent, but lower than previously documented in well-defined populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This was a multi-center trial comprising 25 sites across the United States of America. (NCT0025229). BioMed Central 2009 2009-01-23 /pmc/articles/PMC2644668/ /pubmed/19161635 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1465-9921-10-4 Text en Copyright © 2009 Anderson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Anderson, Sandra D
Charlton, Brett
Weiler, John M
Nichols, Sara
Spector, Sheldon L
Pearlman, David S
Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma
title Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma
title_full Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma
title_fullStr Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma
title_short Comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma
title_sort comparison of mannitol and methacholine to predict exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and a clinical diagnosis of asthma
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2644668/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19161635
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1465-9921-10-4
work_keys_str_mv AT andersonsandrad comparisonofmannitolandmethacholinetopredictexerciseinducedbronchoconstrictionandaclinicaldiagnosisofasthma
AT charltonbrett comparisonofmannitolandmethacholinetopredictexerciseinducedbronchoconstrictionandaclinicaldiagnosisofasthma
AT weilerjohnm comparisonofmannitolandmethacholinetopredictexerciseinducedbronchoconstrictionandaclinicaldiagnosisofasthma
AT nicholssara comparisonofmannitolandmethacholinetopredictexerciseinducedbronchoconstrictionandaclinicaldiagnosisofasthma
AT spectorsheldonl comparisonofmannitolandmethacholinetopredictexerciseinducedbronchoconstrictionandaclinicaldiagnosisofasthma
AT pearlmandavids comparisonofmannitolandmethacholinetopredictexerciseinducedbronchoconstrictionandaclinicaldiagnosisofasthma
AT comparisonofmannitolandmethacholinetopredictexerciseinducedbronchoconstrictionandaclinicaldiagnosisofasthma