Cargando…

Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices

BACKGROUND: The collection of exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is a suitable and non-invasive method for evaluation of airway inflammation. Several studies indicate that the composition of the condensate and the recovery of biomarkers are affected by physical characteristics of the condensing device...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hoffmeyer, Frank, Raulf-Heimsoth, Monika, Harth, Volker, Bünger, Jürgen, Brüning , Thomas
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2793251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19948050
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-9-48
_version_ 1782175305307258880
author Hoffmeyer, Frank
Raulf-Heimsoth, Monika
Harth, Volker
Bünger, Jürgen
Brüning , Thomas
author_facet Hoffmeyer, Frank
Raulf-Heimsoth, Monika
Harth, Volker
Bünger, Jürgen
Brüning , Thomas
author_sort Hoffmeyer, Frank
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The collection of exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is a suitable and non-invasive method for evaluation of airway inflammation. Several studies indicate that the composition of the condensate and the recovery of biomarkers are affected by physical characteristics of the condensing device and collecting circumstances. Additionally, there is an apparent influence of the condensing temperature, and often the level of detection of the assay is a limiting factor. The ECoScreen2 device is a new, partly single-use disposable system designed for studying different lung compartments. METHODS: EBC samples were collected from 16 healthy non-smokers by using the two commercially available devices ECoScreen2 and ECoScreen at a controlled temperature of -20°C. EBC volume, pH, NOx, LTB(4), PGE(2), 8-isoprostane and cys-LTs were determined. RESULTS: EBC collected with ECoScreen2 was less acidic compared to ECoScreen. ECoScreen2 was superior concerning condensate volume and detection of biomarkers, as more samples were above the detection limit (LTB(4 )and PGE(2)) or showed higher concentrations (8-isoprostane). However, NOx was detected only in EBC sampled by ECoScreen. CONCLUSION: ECoScreen2 in combination with mediator specific enzyme immunoassays may be suitable for measurement of different biomarkers. Using this equipment, patterns of markers can be assessed that are likely to reflect the complex pathophysiological processes in inflammatory respiratory disease.
format Text
id pubmed-2793251
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-27932512009-12-15 Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices Hoffmeyer, Frank Raulf-Heimsoth, Monika Harth, Volker Bünger, Jürgen Brüning , Thomas BMC Pulm Med Research article BACKGROUND: The collection of exhaled breath condensate (EBC) is a suitable and non-invasive method for evaluation of airway inflammation. Several studies indicate that the composition of the condensate and the recovery of biomarkers are affected by physical characteristics of the condensing device and collecting circumstances. Additionally, there is an apparent influence of the condensing temperature, and often the level of detection of the assay is a limiting factor. The ECoScreen2 device is a new, partly single-use disposable system designed for studying different lung compartments. METHODS: EBC samples were collected from 16 healthy non-smokers by using the two commercially available devices ECoScreen2 and ECoScreen at a controlled temperature of -20°C. EBC volume, pH, NOx, LTB(4), PGE(2), 8-isoprostane and cys-LTs were determined. RESULTS: EBC collected with ECoScreen2 was less acidic compared to ECoScreen. ECoScreen2 was superior concerning condensate volume and detection of biomarkers, as more samples were above the detection limit (LTB(4 )and PGE(2)) or showed higher concentrations (8-isoprostane). However, NOx was detected only in EBC sampled by ECoScreen. CONCLUSION: ECoScreen2 in combination with mediator specific enzyme immunoassays may be suitable for measurement of different biomarkers. Using this equipment, patterns of markers can be assessed that are likely to reflect the complex pathophysiological processes in inflammatory respiratory disease. BioMed Central 2009-11-30 /pmc/articles/PMC2793251/ /pubmed/19948050 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-9-48 Text en Copyright ©2009 Hoffmeyer 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 article
Hoffmeyer, Frank
Raulf-Heimsoth, Monika
Harth, Volker
Bünger, Jürgen
Brüning , Thomas
Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices
title Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices
title_full Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices
title_fullStr Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices
title_full_unstemmed Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices
title_short Comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices
title_sort comparative analysis of selected exhaled breath biomarkers obtained with two different temperature-controlled devices
topic Research article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2793251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19948050
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2466-9-48
work_keys_str_mv AT hoffmeyerfrank comparativeanalysisofselectedexhaledbreathbiomarkersobtainedwithtwodifferenttemperaturecontrolleddevices
AT raulfheimsothmonika comparativeanalysisofselectedexhaledbreathbiomarkersobtainedwithtwodifferenttemperaturecontrolleddevices
AT harthvolker comparativeanalysisofselectedexhaledbreathbiomarkersobtainedwithtwodifferenttemperaturecontrolleddevices
AT bungerjurgen comparativeanalysisofselectedexhaledbreathbiomarkersobtainedwithtwodifferenttemperaturecontrolleddevices
AT bruningthomas comparativeanalysisofselectedexhaledbreathbiomarkersobtainedwithtwodifferenttemperaturecontrolleddevices