Cargando…
Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling
Despite promising results obtained in the early diagnosis of several pathologies, breath analysis still remains an unused technique in clinical practice due to the lack of breath sampling standardized procedures able to guarantee a good repeatability and comparability of results. The most diffuse on...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7763204/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33321824 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules25245823 |
_version_ | 1783627962448347136 |
---|---|
author | Di Gilio, Alessia Palmisani, Jolanda Ventrella, Gianrocco Facchini, Laura Catino, Annamaria Varesano, Niccolò Pizzutilo, Pamela Galetta, Domenico Borelli, Massimo Barbieri, Pierluigi Licen, Sabina de Gennaro, Gianluigi |
author_facet | Di Gilio, Alessia Palmisani, Jolanda Ventrella, Gianrocco Facchini, Laura Catino, Annamaria Varesano, Niccolò Pizzutilo, Pamela Galetta, Domenico Borelli, Massimo Barbieri, Pierluigi Licen, Sabina de Gennaro, Gianluigi |
author_sort | Di Gilio, Alessia |
collection | PubMed |
description | Despite promising results obtained in the early diagnosis of several pathologies, breath analysis still remains an unused technique in clinical practice due to the lack of breath sampling standardized procedures able to guarantee a good repeatability and comparability of results. The most diffuse on an international scale breath sampling method uses polymeric bags, but, recently, devices named Mistral and ReCIVA, able to directly concentrate volatile organic compounds (VOCs) onto sorbent tubes, have been developed and launched on the market. In order to explore performances of these new automatic devices with respect to sampling in the polymeric bag and to study the differences in VOCs profile when whole or alveolar breath is collected and when pulmonary wash out with clean air is done, a tailored experimental design was developed. Three different breath sampling approaches were compared: (a) whole breath sampling by means of Tedlar bags, (b) the end-tidal breath collection using the Mistral sampler, and (c) the simultaneous collection of the whole and alveolar breath by using the ReCIVA. The obtained results showed that alveolar fraction of breath was relatively less affected by ambient air (AA) contaminants (p-values equal to 0.04 for Mistral and 0.002 for ReCIVA Low) with respect to whole breath (p-values equal to 0.97 for ReCIVA Whole). Compared to Tedlar bags, coherent results were obtained by using Mistral while lower VOCs levels were detected for samples (both breath and AA) collected by ReCIVA, likely due to uncorrected and fluctuating flow rates applied by this device. Finally, the analysis of all data also including data obtained by explorative analysis of the unique lung cancer (LC) breath sample showed that a clean air supply might determine a further confounding factor in breath analysis considering that lung wash-out is species-dependent. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7763204 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77632042020-12-27 Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling Di Gilio, Alessia Palmisani, Jolanda Ventrella, Gianrocco Facchini, Laura Catino, Annamaria Varesano, Niccolò Pizzutilo, Pamela Galetta, Domenico Borelli, Massimo Barbieri, Pierluigi Licen, Sabina de Gennaro, Gianluigi Molecules Article Despite promising results obtained in the early diagnosis of several pathologies, breath analysis still remains an unused technique in clinical practice due to the lack of breath sampling standardized procedures able to guarantee a good repeatability and comparability of results. The most diffuse on an international scale breath sampling method uses polymeric bags, but, recently, devices named Mistral and ReCIVA, able to directly concentrate volatile organic compounds (VOCs) onto sorbent tubes, have been developed and launched on the market. In order to explore performances of these new automatic devices with respect to sampling in the polymeric bag and to study the differences in VOCs profile when whole or alveolar breath is collected and when pulmonary wash out with clean air is done, a tailored experimental design was developed. Three different breath sampling approaches were compared: (a) whole breath sampling by means of Tedlar bags, (b) the end-tidal breath collection using the Mistral sampler, and (c) the simultaneous collection of the whole and alveolar breath by using the ReCIVA. The obtained results showed that alveolar fraction of breath was relatively less affected by ambient air (AA) contaminants (p-values equal to 0.04 for Mistral and 0.002 for ReCIVA Low) with respect to whole breath (p-values equal to 0.97 for ReCIVA Whole). Compared to Tedlar bags, coherent results were obtained by using Mistral while lower VOCs levels were detected for samples (both breath and AA) collected by ReCIVA, likely due to uncorrected and fluctuating flow rates applied by this device. Finally, the analysis of all data also including data obtained by explorative analysis of the unique lung cancer (LC) breath sample showed that a clean air supply might determine a further confounding factor in breath analysis considering that lung wash-out is species-dependent. MDPI 2020-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC7763204/ /pubmed/33321824 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules25245823 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Di Gilio, Alessia Palmisani, Jolanda Ventrella, Gianrocco Facchini, Laura Catino, Annamaria Varesano, Niccolò Pizzutilo, Pamela Galetta, Domenico Borelli, Massimo Barbieri, Pierluigi Licen, Sabina de Gennaro, Gianluigi Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling |
title | Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling |
title_full | Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling |
title_fullStr | Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling |
title_full_unstemmed | Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling |
title_short | Breath Analysis: Comparison among Methodological Approaches for Breath Sampling |
title_sort | breath analysis: comparison among methodological approaches for breath sampling |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7763204/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33321824 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules25245823 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT digilioalessia breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT palmisanijolanda breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT ventrellagianrocco breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT facchinilaura breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT catinoannamaria breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT varesanoniccolo breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT pizzutilopamela breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT galettadomenico breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT borellimassimo breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT barbieripierluigi breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT licensabina breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling AT degennarogianluigi breathanalysiscomparisonamongmethodologicalapproachesforbreathsampling |