Cargando…

Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods

Tidal-breathing methacholine challenges are now recommended by guidelines, to avoid the bronchoprotective effects of deep inhalation. This study compared different tidal breathing methacholine challenge methods; assessed the agreement between tidal dosimetric and continuous output challenges; and as...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dean, James, Jackson, Natalie, Keidel-Morgan, Brett, Hamer, Daniel, Singh, Dave
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: European Respiratory Society 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8573237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34761001
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00282-2021
_version_ 1784595379470204928
author Dean, James
Jackson, Natalie
Keidel-Morgan, Brett
Hamer, Daniel
Singh, Dave
author_facet Dean, James
Jackson, Natalie
Keidel-Morgan, Brett
Hamer, Daniel
Singh, Dave
author_sort Dean, James
collection PubMed
description Tidal-breathing methacholine challenges are now recommended by guidelines, to avoid the bronchoprotective effects of deep inhalation. This study compared different tidal breathing methacholine challenge methods; assessed the agreement between tidal dosimetric and continuous output challenges; and assessed challenge repeatability with different methods. 15 asthma patients performed dosimetric challenges and a continuous-output breath-actuated challenge, all ≥3 days apart. All subjects had a pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) ≥65% predicted, and a cumulative dose causing a 20% reduction in FEV(1) (PD(20)) <1.2 mg. Of the dosimetric challenges, one method increased methacholine concentration (standard dosimetric challenge), and one adjusted nebuliser output time to increase dose (adjusted dosimetric challenge). The adjusted dosimetric and continuous output challenges were performed twice on separate days to assess for repeatability. All challenges were matched for dose at each dose step. The mean PD(20) ratio of the standard dosimetric challenge to the adjusted dosimetric challenge was 0.90 (95% CI 0.66–1.23, p=0.49) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.82. Repeated adjusted dosimetric challenges had an ICC 0.62 for PD(20). Repeated continuous output challenges had an ICC 0.74 for PD(20). The adjusted dosimetric and continuous output challenges correlated (r=0.69, p=0.0043; ICC 0.65), but PD(20) was higher for the adjusted dosimetric challenge (mean PD(20) ratio 2.31, 95% CI 1.57–3.40; p=0.0004). Tidal dosimetric methacholine challenge using adjustment of nebuliser output produces results with good repeatability. The results of this adjusted dosimetric method differed from the continuous output method, underscoring that the results of different methacholine challenge methodologies may not be directly comparable.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8573237
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher European Respiratory Society
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85732372021-11-09 Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods Dean, James Jackson, Natalie Keidel-Morgan, Brett Hamer, Daniel Singh, Dave ERJ Open Res Original Research Articles Tidal-breathing methacholine challenges are now recommended by guidelines, to avoid the bronchoprotective effects of deep inhalation. This study compared different tidal breathing methacholine challenge methods; assessed the agreement between tidal dosimetric and continuous output challenges; and assessed challenge repeatability with different methods. 15 asthma patients performed dosimetric challenges and a continuous-output breath-actuated challenge, all ≥3 days apart. All subjects had a pre-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) ≥65% predicted, and a cumulative dose causing a 20% reduction in FEV(1) (PD(20)) <1.2 mg. Of the dosimetric challenges, one method increased methacholine concentration (standard dosimetric challenge), and one adjusted nebuliser output time to increase dose (adjusted dosimetric challenge). The adjusted dosimetric and continuous output challenges were performed twice on separate days to assess for repeatability. All challenges were matched for dose at each dose step. The mean PD(20) ratio of the standard dosimetric challenge to the adjusted dosimetric challenge was 0.90 (95% CI 0.66–1.23, p=0.49) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.82. Repeated adjusted dosimetric challenges had an ICC 0.62 for PD(20). Repeated continuous output challenges had an ICC 0.74 for PD(20). The adjusted dosimetric and continuous output challenges correlated (r=0.69, p=0.0043; ICC 0.65), but PD(20) was higher for the adjusted dosimetric challenge (mean PD(20) ratio 2.31, 95% CI 1.57–3.40; p=0.0004). Tidal dosimetric methacholine challenge using adjustment of nebuliser output produces results with good repeatability. The results of this adjusted dosimetric method differed from the continuous output method, underscoring that the results of different methacholine challenge methodologies may not be directly comparable. European Respiratory Society 2021-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8573237/ /pubmed/34761001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00282-2021 Text en Copyright ©The authors 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This version is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0. For commercial reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org (mailto:permissions@ersnet.org)
spellingShingle Original Research Articles
Dean, James
Jackson, Natalie
Keidel-Morgan, Brett
Hamer, Daniel
Singh, Dave
Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods
title Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods
title_full Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods
title_fullStr Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods
title_full_unstemmed Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods
title_short Methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods
title_sort methacholine challenges: comparison of different tidal breathing challenge methods
topic Original Research Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8573237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34761001
http://dx.doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00282-2021
work_keys_str_mv AT deanjames methacholinechallengescomparisonofdifferenttidalbreathingchallengemethods
AT jacksonnatalie methacholinechallengescomparisonofdifferenttidalbreathingchallengemethods
AT keidelmorganbrett methacholinechallengescomparisonofdifferenttidalbreathingchallengemethods
AT hamerdaniel methacholinechallengescomparisonofdifferenttidalbreathingchallengemethods
AT singhdave methacholinechallengescomparisonofdifferenttidalbreathingchallengemethods