Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of two standardized methods of methacholine inhalation challenge in young adults.
Eur Respir J. 2000 Jan; 15(1):181-4.ER

Abstract

In the European Community Respiratory Health Study (ECRHS), airway responsiveness to methacholine was determined using the Mefar dosimeter protocol. Elsewhere, the 2-min tidal breathing method has become the preferred standardized method. The relationship between measurements of responsiveness by these two methods is not well established. This study measured airway responsiveness to methacholine by dosimeter and tidal breathing methods in 47 healthy asthmatic subjects aged 20-44 yrs. Tests were performed within 1 week and in random order. Baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) varied by <10% between tests in 42/47 subjects. There was a close association between responsiveness determined by the two methods. A provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) value of < or =8.0 mg x mL(-1) (tidal method) used to categorize airway hyperresponsiveness agreed most closely with a provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PD20) value of < or =0.5 mg (dosimeter method) (kappa statistic 0.78). Each doubling or halving of PC20 to define a level of hyperresponsiveness agreed closely with a doubling or halving of PD20. Assessment of airway responsiveness as provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second by the Mefar dosimeter protocol gave a close and predictable relationship with provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in expiratory volume in one second assessed using the tidal breathing method. Airway hyperresponsiveness as determined by the accepted criterion of provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in expiratory volume in one second < or =8 mg x mL(-1) was best correlated with provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second <0.5 mg by Mefar dosimeter.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Dept of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Controlled Clinical Trial
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

10678643

Citation

Siersted, H C., et al. "Comparison of Two Standardized Methods of Methacholine Inhalation Challenge in Young Adults." The European Respiratory Journal, vol. 15, no. 1, 2000, pp. 181-4.
Siersted HC, Walker CM, O'Shaughnessy AD, et al. Comparison of two standardized methods of methacholine inhalation challenge in young adults. Eur Respir J. 2000;15(1):181-4.
Siersted, H. C., Walker, C. M., O'Shaughnessy, A. D., Willan, A. R., Wiecek, E. M., & Sears, M. R. (2000). Comparison of two standardized methods of methacholine inhalation challenge in young adults. The European Respiratory Journal, 15(1), 181-4.
Siersted HC, et al. Comparison of Two Standardized Methods of Methacholine Inhalation Challenge in Young Adults. Eur Respir J. 2000;15(1):181-4. PubMed PMID: 10678643.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of two standardized methods of methacholine inhalation challenge in young adults. AU - Siersted,H C, AU - Walker,C M, AU - O'Shaughnessy,A D, AU - Willan,A R, AU - Wiecek,E M, AU - Sears,M R, PY - 2000/3/4/pubmed PY - 2000/3/4/medline PY - 2000/3/4/entrez SP - 181 EP - 4 JF - The European respiratory journal JO - Eur. Respir. J. VL - 15 IS - 1 N2 - In the European Community Respiratory Health Study (ECRHS), airway responsiveness to methacholine was determined using the Mefar dosimeter protocol. Elsewhere, the 2-min tidal breathing method has become the preferred standardized method. The relationship between measurements of responsiveness by these two methods is not well established. This study measured airway responsiveness to methacholine by dosimeter and tidal breathing methods in 47 healthy asthmatic subjects aged 20-44 yrs. Tests were performed within 1 week and in random order. Baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) varied by <10% between tests in 42/47 subjects. There was a close association between responsiveness determined by the two methods. A provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) value of < or =8.0 mg x mL(-1) (tidal method) used to categorize airway hyperresponsiveness agreed most closely with a provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PD20) value of < or =0.5 mg (dosimeter method) (kappa statistic 0.78). Each doubling or halving of PC20 to define a level of hyperresponsiveness agreed closely with a doubling or halving of PD20. Assessment of airway responsiveness as provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second by the Mefar dosimeter protocol gave a close and predictable relationship with provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in expiratory volume in one second assessed using the tidal breathing method. Airway hyperresponsiveness as determined by the accepted criterion of provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in expiratory volume in one second < or =8 mg x mL(-1) was best correlated with provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second <0.5 mg by Mefar dosimeter. SN - 0903-1936 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/10678643/Comparison_of_two_standardized_methods_of_methacholine_inhalation_challenge_in_young_adults_ L2 - http://erj.ersjournals.com/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&amp;pmid=10678643 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -