Beyond forced exhalation: impulse oscillometry as a promising tool for bronchial hyperresponsiveness evaluation

Introduction: The multiple forced expiratory maneuvers that must be performed during methacholine test require a high degree of collaboration and can lead to fatigue. However, impulse oscillometry (IOS) is a noninvasive test, quick and easy to perform, that does not require effort-dependent maneuvers. Objectives: The primary endpoint was to evaluate the relationship between IOS and spirometry during the methacholine test. The secondary endpoint was to study the predictive value of baseline IOS in the development of bronchial hyperreactivity. Methods: Observational, prospective, cross-sectional study, with recruitment of consecutive patients from the pulmonology department with clinical suspicion of bronchial asthma with negative bronchodilator test and normal FeNO. Results: Twenty-five patients were included, with a mean age of 49 ± 18 years. Thirteen patients (52%) had a positive methacholine test. The correlation between IOS indices and FEV1 was significant (p < 0.05) in all cases. The indices with the highest predictive power were R5-20 and AX. The optimal cutoff points were an increase of greater than 32.96% in R5, greater than 120.83% for X5, an increase of 30.30 [kPa l-1s-1] in R5-20, and an increase of 1.01 [kPa l-1] for AX. Baseline oscillometry demonstrated a strong predictive value in the development of bronchial hyperreactivity, with a sensitivity of 61.5% and a specificity of 91.7%, using the cut-off point of 160.0% for R5. Conclusions: IOS may be a valuable alternative to forced spirometry in detecting bronchial hyperreactivity during the methacholine test, showing a good correlation between both tests.

[Standard technical specifications for methacholine chloride (Methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023)]

The methacholine challenge test (MCT) is a standard evaluation method of assessing airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) and its severity, and has significant clinical value in the diagnosis and treatment of bronchial asthma. A consensus working group consisting of experts from the Pulmonary Function and Clinical Respiratory Physiology Committee of the Chinese Association of Chest Physicians, the Task Force for Pulmonary Function of the Chinese Thoracic Society, and the Pulmonary Function Group of Respiratory Branch of the Chinese Geriatric Society jointly developed this consensus. Based on the "Guidelines for Pulmonary Function-Bronchial Provocation Test" published in 2014, the issues encountered in its use, and recent developments, the group has updated the Standard technical specifications of methacholine chloride (methacholine) bronchial challenge test (2023). Through an extensive collection of expert opinions, literature reviews, questionnaire surveys, and multiple rounds of online and offline discussions, the consensus addressed the eleven core issues in MCT's clinical practice, including indications, contraindications, preparation of provocative agents, test procedures and methods, quality control, safety management, interpretation of results, and reporting standards. The aim was to provide clinical pulmonary function practitioners in healthcare institutions with the tools to optimize the use of this technique to guide clinical diagnosis and treatment.Summary of recommendationsQuestion 1: Who is suitable for conducting MCT? What are contraindications for performing MCT?Patients with atypical symptoms and a clinical suspicion of asthma, patients diagnosed with asthma requiring assessment of the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness, individuals with allergic rhinitis who are at risk of developing asthma, patients in need of evaluating the effectiveness of asthma treatment, individuals in occupations with high safety risks due to airway hyperresponsiveness, patients with chronic diseases prone to airway hyperresponsiveness, others requiring assessment of airway reactivity.Absolute contraindications: (1) Patients who are allergic to methacholine (MCh) or other parasympathomimetic drugs, with allergic reactions including rash, itching/swelling (especially of the face, tongue, and throat), severe dizziness, and dyspnea; (2) Patients with a history of life-threatening asthma attacks or those who have required mechanical ventilation for asthma attacks in the past three months; (3) Patients with moderate to severe impairment of baseline pulmonary function [Forced Expiratory Volume in one second (FEV1) less than 60% of the predicted value or FEV1<1.0 L]; (4) Severe urticaria; (5) Other situations inappropriate for forced vital capacity (FVC) measurement, such as myocardial infarction or stroke in the past three months, poorly controlled hypertension, aortic aneurysm, recent eye surgery, or increased intracranial pressure.Relative contraindications: (1) Moderate or more severe impairment of baseline lung function (FEV1%pred<70%), but individuals with FEV1%pred>60% may still be considered for MCT with strict observation and adequate preparation; (2) Experiencing asthma acute exacerbation; (3) Poor cooperation with baseline lung function tests that do not meet quality control requirements; (4) Recent respiratory tract infection (<4 weeks); (5) Pregnant or lactating women; (6) Patients currently using cholinesterase inhibitors (for the treatment of myasthenia gravis); (7) Patients who have previously experienced airway spasm during pulmonary function tests, with a significant decrease in FEV1 even without the inhalation of provocative.Question 2: How to prepare and store the challenge solution for MCT?Before use, the drug must be reconstituted and then diluted into various concentrations for provocation. The dilution concentration and steps for MCh vary depending on the inhalation method and provocation protocol used. It is important to follow specific steps. Typically, a specified amount of diluent is added to the methacholine reagent bottle for reconstitution, and the mixture is shaken until the solution becomes clear. The diluent is usually physiological saline, but saline with phenol (0.4%) can also be used. Phenol can reduce the possibility of bacterial contamination, and its presence does not interfere with the provocation test. After reconstitution, other concentrations of MCh solution are prepared using the same diluent, following the dilution steps, and then stored separately in sterile containers. Preparers should carefully verify and label the concentration and preparation time of the solution and complete a preparation record form. The reconstituted and diluted MCh solution is ready for immediate use without the need for freezing. It can be stored for two weeks if refrigerated (2-8 ℃). The reconstituted solution should not be stored directly in the nebulizer reservoir to prevent crystallization from blocking the capillary opening and affecting aerosol output. The temperature of the solution can affect the production of the nebulizer and cause airway spasms in the subject upon inhaling cold droplets. Thus, refrigerated solutions should be brought to room temperature before use.Question 3: What preparation is required for subjects prior to MCT?(1) Detailed medical history inquiry and exclusion of contraindications.(2) Inquiring about factors and medications that may affect airway reactivity and assessing compliance with medication washout requirements: When the goal is to evaluate the effectiveness of asthma treatment, bronchodilators other than those used for asthma treatment do not need to be discontinued. Antihistamines and cromolyn have no effect on MCT responses, and the effects of a single dose of inhaled corticosteroids and leukotriene modifiers are minimal, thus not requiring cessation before the test. For patients routinely using corticosteroids, whether to discontinue the medication depends on the objective of the test: if assisting in the diagnosis of asthma, differential diagnosis, aiding in step-down therapy for asthma, or exploring the effect of discontinuing anti-inflammatory treatment, corticosteroids should be stopped before the provocation test; if the patient is already diagnosed with asthma and the objective is to observe the level of airway reactivity under controlled medication conditions, then discontinuation is not necessary. Medications such as IgE monoclonal antibodies, IL-4Rα monoclonal antibodies, traditional Chinese medicine, and ethnic medicines may interfere with test results, and clinicians should decide whether to discontinue these based on the specific circumstances.(3) Explaining the test procedure and potential adverse reactions, and obtaining informed consent if necessary.Question 4: What are the methods of the MCT? And which ones are recommended in current clinical practice?Commonly used methods for MCT in clinical practice include the quantitative nebulization method (APS method), Forced Oscillalion method (Astograph method), 2-minute tidal breathing method (Cockcroft method), hand-held quantitative nebulization method (Yan method), and 5-breath method (Chai 5-breath method). The APS method allows for precise dosing of inhaled Methacholine, ensuring accurate and reliable results. The Astograph method, which uses respiratory resistance as an assessment indicator, is easy for subjects to perform and is the simplest operation. These two methods are currently the most commonly used clinical practice in China.Question 5: What are the steps involved in MCT?The MCT consists of the following four steps:(1) Baseline lung function test: After a 15-minute rest period, the subjects assumes a seated position and wear a nose clip for the measurement of pulmonary function indicators [such as FEV1 or respiratory resistance (Rrs)]. FEV1 should be measured at least three times according to spirometer quality control standards, ensuring that the best two measurements differ by less than 150 ml and recording the highest value as the baseline. Usually, if FEV1%pred is below 70%, proceeding with the challenge test is not suitable, and a bronchodilation test should be considered. However, if clinical assessment of airway reactivity is necessary and FEV1%pred is between 60% and 70%, the provocation test may still be conducted under close observation, ensuring the subject's safety. If FEV1%pred is below 60%, it is an absolute contraindication for MCT.(2) Inhalation of diluent and repeat lung function test for control values: the diluent, serving as a control for the inhaled MCh, usually does not significantly impact the subject's lung function. the higher one between baseline value and the post-dilution FEV1 is used as the reference for calculating the rate of FEV1 decline. If post-inhalation FEV1 decreases, there are usually three scenarios: ①If FEV1 decreases by less than 10% compared to the baseline, the test can proceed, continue the test and administer the first dose of MCh. ②If the FEV1 decreases by≥10% and<20%, indicating a heightened airway reactivity to the diluent, proceed with the lowest concentration (dose) of the provoking if FEV1%pred has not yet reached the contraindication criteria for the MCT. if FEV1%pred<60% and the risk of continuing the challenge test is considerable, it is advisable to switch to a bronchodilation test and indicate the change in the test results report. ③If FEV1 decreases by≥20%, it can be directly classified as a positive challenge test, and the test should be discontinued, with bronchodilators administered to alleviate airway obstruction.(3) Inhalation of MCh and repeat lung function test to assess decline: prepare a series of MCh concentrations, starting from the lowest and gradually increasing the inhaled concentration (dose) using different methods. Perform pulmonary function tests at 30 seconds and 90 seconds after completing nebulization, with the number of measurements limited to 3-4 times. A complete Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) measurement is unnecessary during testing; only an acceptable FEV1 measurement is required. The interval between two consecutive concentrations (doses) generally should not exceed 3 minutes. If FEV1 declines by≥10% compared to the control value, reduce the increment of methacholine concentration (dose) and adjust the inhalation protocol accordingly. If FEV1 declines by≥20% or more compared to the control value or if the maximum concentration (amount) has been inhaled, the test should be stopped. After inhaling the MCh, close observation of the subject's response is necessary. If necessary, monitor blood oxygen saturation and auscultate lung breath sounds. The test should be promptly discontinued in case of noticeable clinical symptoms or signs.(4) Inhalation of bronchodilator and repeat lung function test to assess recovery: when the bronchial challenge test shows a positive response (FEV1 decline≥20%) or suspiciously positive, the subject should receive inhaled rapid-acting bronchodilators, such as short-acting beta-agonists (SABA) or short-acting muscarinic antagonists (SAMA). Suppose the subject exhibits obvious symptoms of breathlessness, wheezing, or typical asthma manifestations, and wheezing is audible in the lungs, even if the positive criteria are not met. In that case, the challenge test should be immediately stopped, and rapid-acting bronchodilators should be administered. Taking salbutamol as an example, inhale 200-400 μg (100 μg per puff, 2-4 puffs, as determined by the physician based on the subject's condition). Reassess pulmonary function after 5-10 minutes. If FEV1 recovers to within 10% of the baseline value, the test can be concluded. However, if there is no noticeable improvement (FEV1 decline still≥10%), record the symptoms and signs and repeat the bronchodilation procedure as mentioned earlier. Alternatively, add Ipratropium bromide (SAMA) or further administer nebulized bronchodilators and corticosteroids for intensified treatment while keeping the subject under observation until FEV1 recovers to within 90% of the baseline value before allowing the subject to leave.Question 6: What are the quality control requirements for the APS and Astograph MCT equipment?(1) APS Method Equipment Quality Control: The APS method for MCT uses a nebulizing inhalation device that requires standardized flowmeters, compressed air power source pressure and flow, and nebulizer aerosol output. Specific quality control methods are as follows:a. Flow and volume calibration of the quantitative nebulization device: Connect the flowmeter, an empty nebulization chamber, and a nebulization filter in sequence, attaching the compressed air source to the bottom of the chamber to ensure airtight connections. Then, attach a 3 L calibration syringe to the subject's breathing interface and simulate the flow during nebulization (typically low flow:<2 L/s) to calibrate the flow and volume. If calibration results exceed the acceptable range of the device's technical standards, investigate and address potential issues such as air leaks or increased resistance due to a damp filter, then recalibrate. Cleaning the flowmeter or replacing the filter can change the resistance in the breathing circuit, requiring re-calibration of the flow.b. Testing the compressed air power source: Regularly test the device, connecting the components as mentioned above. Then, block the opening of the nebulization device with a stopper or hand, start the compressed air power source, and test its pressure and flow. If the test results do not meet the technical standards, professional maintenance of the equipment may be required.c. Verification of aerosol output of the nebulization chamber: Regularly verify all nebulization chambers used in provocation tests. Steps include adding a certain amount of saline to the chamber, weighing and recording the chamber's weight (including saline), connecting the nebulizer to the quantitative nebulization device, setting the nebulization time, starting nebulization, then weighing and recording the post-nebulization weight. Calculate the unit time aerosol output using the formula [(weight before nebulization-weight after nebulization)/nebulization time]. Finally, set the nebulization plan for the provocation test based on the aerosol output, considering the MCh concentration, single inhalation nebulization duration, number of nebulization, and cumulative dose to ensure precise dosing of the inhaled MCh.(2) Astograph method equipment quality control: Astograph method equipment for MCT consists of a respiratory resistance monitoring device and a nebulization medication device. Perform zero-point calibration, volume calibration, impedance verification, and nebulization chamber checks daily before tests to ensure the resistance measurement system and nebulization system function properly. Calibration is needed every time the equipment is turned on, and more frequently if there are significant changes in environmental conditions.a. Zero-point calibration: Perform zero-point calibration before testing each subject. Ensure the nebulization chamber is properly installed and plugged with no air leaks.b. Volume calibration: Use a 3 L calibration syringe to calibrate the flow sensor at a low flow rate (approximately 1 L/s).c. Resistance verification: Connect low impedance tubes (1.9-2.2 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) and high impedance tubes (10.2-10.7 cmH2O·L-1·s-1) to the device interface for verification.d. Bypass check: Start the bypass check and record the bypass value; a value>150 ml/s is normal.e. Nebulization chamber check: Check each of the 12 nebulization chambers daily, especially those containing bronchodilators, to ensure normal spraying. The software can control each nebulization chamber to produce spray automatically for a preset duration (e.g., 2 seconds). Observe the formation of water droplets on the chamber walls, indicating normal spraying. If no nebulization occurs, check for incorrect connections or blockages.Question 7: How to set up and select the APS method in MCT?The software program of the aerosol provocation system in the quantitative nebulization method can independently set the nebulizer output, concentration of the methacholine agent, administration time, and number of administrations and combine these parameters to create the challenge test process. In principle, the concentration of the methacholine agent should increase from low to high, and the dose should increase from small to large. According to the standard, a 2-fold or 4-fold incremental challenge process is generally used. In clinical practice, the dose can be simplified for subjects with good baseline lung function and no history of wheezing, such as using a recommended 2-concentration, 5-step method (25 and 50 g/L) and (6.25 and 25 g/L). Suppose FEV1 decreases by more than 10% compared to the baseline during the test to ensure subject safety. In that case, the incremental dose of the methacholine agent can be reduced, and the inhalation program can be adjusted appropriately. If the subject's baseline lung function declines or has recent daytime or nighttime symptoms such as wheezing or chest tightness, a low concentration, low dose incremental process should be selected.Question 8: What are the precautions for the operation process of the Astograph method in MCT?(1) Test equipment: The Astograph method utilizes the forced oscillation technique, applying a sinusoidal oscillating pressure at the mouthpiece during calm breathing. Subjects inhale nebulized MCh of increasing concentrations while continuous monitoring of respiratory resistance (Rrs) plots the changes, assessing airway reactivity and sensitivity. The nebulization system employs jet nebulization technology, comprising a compressed air pump and 12 nebulization cups. The first cup contains saline, cups 2 to 11 contain increasing concentrations of MCh, and the 12th cup contains a bronchodilator solution.(2) Provocation process: Prepare 10 solutions of MCh provocant with gradually increasing concentrations.(3) Operational procedure: The oscillation frequency is usually set to 3 Hz (7 Hz for children) during the test. The subject breathes calmly, inhales saline solution nebulized first, and records the baseline resistance value (if the subject's baseline resistance value is higher than 10 cmH2O·L-1·s-1, the challenge test should not be performed). Then, the subject gradually inhales increasing concentrations of methacholine solution. Each concentration solution is inhaled for 1 minute, and the nebulization system automatically switches to the next concentration for inhalation according to the set time. Each nebulizer cup contains 2-3 ml of solution, the output is 0.15 ml/min, and each concentration is inhaled for 1 minute. The dose-response curve is recorded automatically. Subjects should breathe tidally during the test, avoiding deep breaths and swallowing. Continue until Rrs significantly rises to more than double the baseline value, or if the subject experiences notable respiratory symptoms or other discomfort, such as wheezing in both lungs upon auscultation. At this point, the inhalation of the provocant should be stopped and the subject switchs to inhaling a bronchodilator until Rrs returns to pre-provocation levels. If there is no significant increase in Rrs, stop the test after inhaling the highest concentration of MCh.Question 9: How to interpret the results of the MCT?The method chosen for the MCT determines the specific indicators used for interpretation. The most commonly used indicator is FEV1, although other parameters such as Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF) and Rrs can also be used to assess airway hyperresponsiveness.Qualitative judgment: The test results can be classified as positive, suspiciously positive, or negative, based on a combination of the judgment indicators and changes in the subject's symptoms. If FEV1 decreases by≥20% compared to the baseline value after not completely inhaling at the highest concentration, the result can be judged as positive for Methacholine bronchial challenge test. If the patient has obvious wheezing symptoms or wheezing is heard in both lungs, but the challenge test does not meet the positive criteria (the highest dose/concentration has been inhaled), and FEV1 decreases between 10% and 20% compared to the baseline level, the result can also be judged as positive. If FEV1 decreases between 15% and 20% compared to the baseline value without dyspnea or wheezing attacks, the result can be judged as suspiciously positive. Astograph method: If Rrs rises to 2 times or more of the baseline resistance before reaching the highest inhalation concentration, or if the subject's lungs have wheezing and severe coughing, the challenge test can be judged as positive. Regardless of the result of the Methacholine bronchial challenge test, factors that affect airway reactivity, such as drugs, seasons, climate, diurnal variations, and respiratory tract infections, should be excluded.Quantitative judgment: When using the APS method, the severity of airway hyperresponsiveness can be graded based on PD20-FEV1 or PC20-FEV1. Existing evidence suggests that PD20 shows good consistency when different nebulizers, inhalation times, and starting concentrations of MCh are used for bronchial provocation tests, whereas there is more variability with PC20. Therefore, PD20 is often recommended as the quantitative assessment indicator. The threshold value for PD20 with the APS method is 2.5 mg.The Astograph method often uses the minimum cumulative dose (Dmin value, in Units) to reflect airway sensitivity. Dmin is the minimum cumulative dose of MCh required to produce a linear increase in Rrs. A dose of 1 g/L of the drug concentration inhaled for 1-minute equals 1 unit. It's important to note that with the continuous increase in inhaled provocant concentration, the concept of cumulative dose in the Astograph method should not be directly compared to other methods. Most asthma patients have a Dmin<10 Units, according to Japanese guidelines. The Astograph method, having been used in China for over twenty years, suggests a high likelihood of asthma when Dmin≤6 Units, with a smaller Dmin value indicating a higher probability. When Dmin is between 6 and 10 Units, further differential diagnosis is advised to ascertain whether the condition is asthma.Precautions:A negative methacholine challenge test (MCT) does not entirely rule out asthma. The test may yield negative results due to the following reasons:(1) Prior use of medications that reduce airway responsiveness, such as β2 agonists, anticholinergic drugs, antihistamines, leukotriene receptor antagonists, theophylline, corticosteroids, etc., and insufficient washout time.(2) Failure to meet quality control standards in terms of pressure, flow rate, particle size, and nebulization volume of the aerosol delivery device.(3) Poor subject cooperation leads to inadequate inhalation of the methacholine agent.(4) Some exercise-induced asthma patients may not be sensitive to direct bronchial challenge tests like the Methacholine challenge and require indirect bronchial challenge tests such as hyperventilation, cold air, or exercise challenge to induce a positive response.(5) A few cases of occupational asthma may only react to specific antigens or sensitizing agents, requiring specific allergen exposure to elicit a positive response.A positive MCT does not necessarily indicate asthma. Other conditions can also present with airway hyperresponsiveness and yield positive results in the challenge test, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic bronchitis, viral upper respiratory infections, allergic alveolitis, tropical eosinophilia, cystic fibrosis, sarcoidosis, bronchiectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, post-cardiopulmonary transplant, congestive heart failure, and more. Furthermore, factors like smoking, air pollution, or exercise before the test may also result in a positive bronchial challenge test.Question 10: What are the standardized requirements for the MCT report?The report should include: (1) basic information about the subject; (2) examination data and graphics: present baseline data, measurement data after the last two challenge doses or concentrations in tabular form, and the percentage of actual measured values compared to the baseline; flow-volume curve and volume-time curve before and after challenge test; dose-response curve: showing the threshold for positive challenge; (3) opinions and conclusions of the report: including the operator's opinions, quality rating of the examination, and review opinions of the reviewing physician.Question 11: What are the adverse reactions and safety measures of MCT?During the MCT, the subject needs to repeatedly breathe forcefully and inhale bronchial challenge agents, which may induce or exacerbate bronchospasm and contraction and may even cause life-threatening situations. Medical staff should be fully aware of the indications, contraindications, medication use procedures, and emergency response plans for the MCT.

The role of bronchial challenge test in guiding therapy in preschool children with atypical recurrent respiratory symptoms

OBJECTIVE

This retrospective observational cohort study aimed to assess the real-life application of bronchial challenge test (BCT) in the management of preschool children presenting with atypical recurrent respiratory symptoms (ARRS).

METHODS

We included children aged 0.5-6 years referred to a pediatric-pulmonology clinic who underwent BCT using methacholine or adenosine between 2012 and 2018 due to ARRS. BCT was considered positive based on spirometry results and/or wheezing, desaturation, and tachypnea reactions. We collected data on demographics, BCT results, pre-BCT and post-BCT treatment changes, and 3-6 months post-BCT compliance and symptom control. The primary outcome measure was the change in treatment post-BCT (step-up or step-down).

RESULTS

A total of 228 children (55% males) with a mean age of 4.2 ± 0.6 years underwent BCT (52% adenosine-BCT, 48% methacholine-BCT). Children referred for methacholine were significantly younger compared with adenosine (3.6 ± 1.2 vs. 4.2 ± 1.2 years, p < .01). Methacholine and adenosine BCTs were positive in 95% and 61%, respectively. Overall, changes in management were observed in 122 (53.5%) children following BCT, with 83 (36.4%) being stepped up and 37 (17%) being stepped down. Significantly more children in the methacholine group were stepped up compared with the adenosine group (46% vs. 28%, p = .004). During the follow-up assessment, we observed a clinical improvement in 119/162 (73.4%) of the children, with nearly 87% being compliant.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the importance of BCT in the management of preschool children presenting to pediatric pulmonary units with ARRS. The change in treatment and subsequent clinical improvement observed highlight the added value of BCT to the pulmonologist.

Mucociliary Clearance Differs in Mild Asthma by Levels of Type 2 Inflammation

BACKGROUND

Although mucus plugging is a well-reported feature of asthma, whether asthma and type 2 inflammation affect mucociliary clearance (MCC) is unknown.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does type 2 inflammation influence mucus clearance rates in patients with mild asthma who are not receiving corticosteroids?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

The clearance rates of inhaled radiolabeled particles were compared between patients with mild asthma with low (n = 17) and high (n = 18) levels of T2 inflammation. Fraction exhaled nitric oxide (Feno) was used to prospectively segregate subjects into T2 Lo (Feno < 25 ppb) and T2 Hi (Feno > 35 ppb) cohorts. Bronchial brush samples were collected with fiber-optic bronchoscopy, and quantitative polymerase chain reaction was performed to measure expression of genes associated with T2 asthma. MCC rate comparisons were also made with a historical group of healthy control subjects (HCs, n = 12).

RESULTS

The T2 Lo cohort demonstrated increased MCC when compared with both T2 Hi and historic HCs. MCC within the T2 Hi group varied significantly, with some subjects having low or zero clearance. MCC decreased with increasing expression of several markers of T2 airway inflammation (CCL26, NOS2, and POSTN) and with Feno. MUC5AC and FOXJ1 expression was similar between the T2Lo and T2Hi cohorts.

INTERPRETATION

Increasing T2 inflammation was associated with decreasing MCC. High rates of MCC in T2 Lo subjects may indicate a compensatory mechanism present in mild disease but lost with high levels of inflammation. Future studies are required to better understand mechanisms and whether impairments in MCC in more severe asthma drive worse clinical outcomes.

Current Asthma Prevalence Using Methacholine Challenge Test in Korean Children from 2010 to 2014

BACKGROUND

Most epidemiological studies depend on the subjects' response to asthma symptom questionnaires. Questionnaire-based study for childhood asthma prevalence may overestimate the true prevalence. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of "Current asthma" using the International Study of Asthma and Allergies in Childhood (ISAAC) questionnaire and methacholine challenge test in Korean children.

METHODS

Our survey on allergic disease included 4,791 children (age 7-12 years) from 2010 to 2014 in Korean elementary schools. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) was defined as provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (PC20) ≤ 16 mg/mL. "Current asthma symptoms" was defined as positive response to "Wheezing, current," "Treatment, current," or "Exercise, current." "Current asthma" was defined when the subjects with "Current asthma symptoms" showed BHR on the methacholine challenge test or had less than 70% of predicted FEV1 value.

RESULTS

The prevalence of "Wheezing, ever," "Wheezing, current," "Diagnosis, ever," "Treatment, current," "Exercise, current," and "Current asthma symptoms" was 19.6%, 6.9%, 10.0%, 3.3%, 3.5%, and 9.6%, respectively, in our cross-sectional study of Korean elementary school students. The prevalence of BHR in elementary school students was 14.5%. The prevalence of BHR in children with "Wheezing, ever," "Wheezing, current," "Diagnosis, ever," "Treatment, current," and "Exercise, current" was 22.3%, 30.5%, 22.4%, 28.8%, and 29.9%, respectively. BHR was 26.1% in those with "Current asthma symptoms." The prevalence of "Current asthma" was 2.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our large-scale study provides 2.7% prevalence of current asthma in Korean elementary school children. Since approximately one third of the children who have "Current asthma symptoms" present BHR, both subjective and objective methods are required to accurately predict asthma in subjects with asthma symptoms.

Allergen bronchoprovocation test: an important research tool supporting precision medicine

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Allergen bronchoprovocation test (ABT) has been used to study asthma pathophysiology and as a disease-modelling tool to assess the properties and efficacy of new asthma drugs. In view of the complexity and heterogeneity of asthma, which has driven the definition of several phenotypes and endotypes, we aim to discuss the role of ABT in the era of precision medicine and provide guidance for clinicians how to interpret and use available data to understand the implications for the benefits of asthma treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review, we summarize background knowledge and applications of ABT and provide an update with recent publications on this topic. In the past years, several studies have been published on ABT in combination with non-invasive and invasive airway samplings and innovative detection techniques allowing to study several inflammatory mechanisms linked to Th2-pathway and allergen-induced pathophysiology throughout the airways.

SUMMARY

ABT is a valuable research tool, which has strongly contributed to precision medicine by helping to define allergen-triggered key inflammatory pathways and airway pathophysiology, and thus helped to shape our understanding of allergen-driven asthma phenotypes and endotypes. In addition, ABT has been instrumental to assess the interactions and effects of new-targeted asthma treatments along these pathways.

Value of bronchial reversibility to salbutamol, exhaled nitric oxide and responsiveness to methacholine to corroborate the diagnosis of asthma in children

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Functional and inflammatory measures have been recommended to corroborate asthma diagnosis in schoolchildren, but the evidence in this regard is conflicting. We aimed to determine, in real-life clinical situation, the value of spirometry, spirometric bronchial reversibility to salbutamol (BDR), bronchial responsiveness to methacholine (MCT) and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO), to corroborate the diagnosis of asthma in children on regular inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) referred from primary care.

METHODS

One hundred and seventy-seven schoolchildren with mild-moderate persistent asthma, on treatment with regular ICS, participated in the study. Abnormal tests were defined as FENO ≥ 27 ppb, BDR (FEV1 ≥ 12%) and methacholine PC20 ≤ 4 mg/mL.

RESULTS

The proportions of positive BDR, FENO and MCT, were 16.4%, 33.3%, and 87.0%, respectively. MCT was associated with FENO (p < 0.03) and BDR (p = 0.001); FENO was associated with BDR (p = 0.045), family history of asthma (p = 0.003) and use of asthma medication in the first two years of life (p = 0.004). BDR was significantly related with passive tobacco exposure (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Spirometry, BDR and BDR had a poor performance for corroborating diagnosis in our asthmatic children on ICS treatment; on the contrary, MCT was positive in most of them, which agrees with previous reports. Although asthma tests are useful to corroborate asthma when positive, clinical diagnosis remains the best current approach for asthma diagnosis, at least while better objective and feasible measurements at the daily practice are available. At present, these tests may have a better role for assessing the management and progression of the condition.

Quantitative assessment of airway remodelling and response to allergen in asthma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In vivo evaluation of the microstructural differences between asthmatic and non-asthmatic airways and their functional consequences is relevant to understanding and, potentially, treating asthma. In this study, we use endobronchial optical coherence tomography to investigate how allergic airways with asthma differ from allergic non-asthmatic airways in baseline microstructure and in response to allergen challenge.

METHODS

A total of 45 subjects completed the study, including 20 allergic, mildly asthmatic individuals, 22 non-asthmatic allergic controls and 3 healthy controls. A 3-cm airway segment in the right middle and right upper lobe were imaged in each subject immediately before and 24 h following segmental allergen challenge to the right middle lobe. Relationships between optical airway measurements (epithelial and mucosal thicknesses, mucosal buckling and mucus) and airway obstruction (FEV1 /FVC (forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity) and FEV1 % (FEV1 as a percentage of predictive value)) were investigated.

RESULTS

Significant increases at baseline and in response to allergen were observed for all four of our imaging metrics in the asthmatic airways compared to the non-asthmatic airways. Epithelial thickness and mucosal buckling exhibited a significant relationship to FEV1 /FVC in the asthmatic group.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous assessments of airway microstructure, buckling and mucus revealed both structural and functional differences between the mildly asthmatic and control groups, with airway buckling seeming to be the most relevant factor. The results of this study demonstrate that a comprehensive, microstructural approach to assessing the airways may be important in future asthma studies as well as in the monitoring and treatment of asthma.

Cold air exercise screening for exercise induced bronchoconstriction in cold weather athletes

Exercise Induced Bronchoconstriction (EIB) prevalence in cold weather athletes is high. Currently, no standardized cold air exercise provocation test exists. Thus we aimed to determine EIB prevalence using a Cold Air Test (CAT; 5 km outdoor running; -15 °C) compared to the most common EIB screen the Eucapnic Voluntary Hyperpnea (EVH) test in cold weather athletes. Sixteen (9 male; 20-35 years old) cold weather athletes completed EVH 72 h before CAT. Spirometry, Fractional Expired Nitric Oxide (FENO), respiratory symptoms were measured and atopy status was determined. Five and 7 participants were EIB + on the EVH and CAT, respectively. Level of agreement was 50% between tests. FEV₁ recovery was significantly prolonged and Peak Expiratory Flow was decreased after CAT compared to EVH. Predictive characteristics of EIB + included FENO >12 ppb, FEV₁/FVC ratio (<0.75) and BMI < 20. EVH does not always reflect EIB triggered by cold weather exercise. More research is required to understand the best EIB screens for cold weather athletes.

[The contribution of an asthma diagnostic consultation service in obtaining an accurate asthma diagnosis for primary care patients: results of a real-life study]

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies showed that general practitioners (GPs) have problems in diagnosing asthma accurately, resulting in both under and overdiagnosis. To support GPs in their diagnostic process an asthma diagnostic consultation service (ADCS) was set up.

DESIGN

We evaluated the performance of this ADCS by analysing the (dis)concordance between the GPs working hypotheses and the ADCS diagnoses and possible consequences this had on the patients' pharmacotherapy.

METHOD

In total 659 patients were included in this study. At this service the patients' medical history was taken and a physical examination and a histamine challenge test were carried out. We compared the GPs working hypotheses with the ADCS diagnoses and the change in medication this incurred.

RESULTS

In 52% (n = 340) an asthma diagnosis was excluded. The diagnosis was confirmed in 42% (n = 275). Furthermore, chronic rhinitis was diagnosed in 40% (n = 261) of the patients whereas this was noted in 25% (n = 163) by their GP. The adjusted diagnosis resulted in a change of medication for more than half of all patients. In 10% (n = 63) medication was started because of a new asthma diagnosis. The 'one-stop-shop' principle was met with 53% of patients and 91% (n = 599) were referred back to their GP, mostly within 6 months. Only 6% (n = 41) remained under control of the ADCS because of severe unstable asthma.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the ADCS helped GPs significantly in setting accurate diagnoses for their patients with an asthma hypothesis. This may contribute to diminish the problem of over and underdiagnosis and may result in more appropriate treatment regimens.

Patterns of sensitization to inhalant and food allergens among pediatric patients from the Moscow region (Russian Federation)

The immunological profiles of human specific IgE (sIgE) and specific IgG4 (sIgG4) vary by genetic predisposition, living conditions in different geographical locations and patient’s age. The aim of our study was to analyze sIgE and sIgG4 patterns and their age-dependent changes in patients from the Moscow region. For identifying sIgE and sIgG4 profiles the blood samples from 513 patients aged 6 months to 17 years who were showing symptoms of allergic diseases were analyzed using microarrays containing 31 allergens. The highest sIgE prevalence was observed for birch pollen (32%) among pollen allergens, cat dander (24%) among indoor allergens, and egg whites (21%) among food allergens. The most common sIgG4 response was developed toward egg whites (80% of patients). Age-related elevation was identified for patients with increased sIgE to pollen allergens and indoor allergens (cat or dog dander and house dust mites). For each allergen, the proportion of cases with significant levels of sIgG4 appeared to increase with patients’ age. The data on allergen-specific sIgE and sIgG4 prevalence show both general trends and some local special aspects that are indicative for the Moscow region. This information should be useful in terms of epidemiology of allergic diseases.

Pro and Contra: Provocation Tests in Drug Hypersensitivity

Drug provocation test (DPT) is the controlled administration of a drug to diagnose immune- or non-immune-mediated drug hypersensitivity and the last step for accurate recognition of drug hypersensitivity reactions when the previous diagnostic evaluations are negative or unavailable. A DPT is performed only if other conventional tests fail to yield conclusive results. In each clinical presentation, "to provoke or not to provoke" a patient should be decided after careful assessment of the risk-benefit ratio. Well-defined benefits of DPT include confirmative exclusion of diagnoses of drug hypersensitivity and provision of safe alternatives. However, disadvantages such as safety, difficulty in interpretations of results, lack of objective biomarkers, risks of resensitization, efficiency in daily practice, and lack of standardized protocols, are poorly debated. This review summarizes the current published research concerning DPT, with particular emphasis on the advantages and disadvantages of DPT in an evidence-based manner.

Reversion of methacholine induced bronchoconstriction with inhaled diazepam in patients with asthma

BACKGROUND

Benzodiazepines have a direct bronchodilatory effect. Methacholine is a non-selective muscarinic receptor agonist causing bronchoconstriction.

AIM

To examine the effects of inhaled benzodiazepines, modulating bronchoconstriction induced by methacholine in patients with asthma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twelve patients with well controlled asthma were studied. On the first day, after determining the initial values of pulmonary function, a dose response curve was carried out with progressive doses of methacholine. After the last dose, when at least a 20% drop of the initial forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) was achieved, vital capacity (VC) and FEV1 were measured at 7, 15 and 30 minutes after provocation. On the second day a diazepam aerosol was inhaled by the patients prior to the same protocol with methacholine.

RESULTS

In the first day of testing, methacholine inhalation (6 mg/mL) led to a significant drop in FEV1 from 2.98 to 1.69 L. On the second day of study, in the same patients, previous inhalation with diazepam reduced the changes of FEV1 after inhalation of methacholine. This parameter decreased from 2.48 to 2.21 L.

CONCLUSIONS

Inhalation of benzodiazepines reduce bronchoconstriction after a methacholine challenge in patients with asthma.

Objective Cough Frequency, Airway Inflammation, and Disease Control in Asthma

BACKGROUND

Cough is recognized as an important troublesome symptom in the diagnosis and monitoring of asthma. Asthma control is thought to be determined by the degree of airway inflammation and hyperresponsiveness but how these factors relate to cough frequency is unclear. The goal of this study was to investigate the relationships between objective cough frequency, disease control, airflow obstruction, and airway inflammation in asthma.

METHODS

Participants with asthma underwent 24-h ambulatory cough monitoring and assessment of exhaled nitric oxide, spirometry, methacholine challenge, and sputum induction (cell counts and inflammatory mediator levels). Asthma control was assessed by using the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) classification and the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ). The number of cough sounds was manually counted and expressed as coughs per hour (c/h).

RESULTS

Eighty-nine subjects with asthma (mean ± SD age, 57 ± 12 years; 57% female) were recruited. According to GINA criteria, 18 (20.2%) patients were classified as controlled, 39 (43.8%) partly controlled, and 32 (36%) uncontrolled; the median ACQ score was 1 (range, 0.0-4.4). The 6-item ACQ correlated with 24-h cough frequency (r = 0.40; P < .001), and patients with uncontrolled asthma (per GINA criteria) had higher median 24-h cough frequency (4.2 c/h; range, 0.3-27.6) compared with partially controlled asthma (1.8 c/h; range, 0.2-25.3; P = .01) and controlled asthma (1.7 c/h; range, 0.3-6.7; P = .002). Measures of airway inflammation were not significantly different between GINA categories and were not correlated with ACQ. In multivariate analyses, increasing cough frequency and worsening FEV1 independently predicted measures of asthma control.

CONCLUSIONS

Ambulatory cough frequency monitoring provides an objective assessment of asthma symptoms that correlates with standard measures of asthma control but not airflow obstruction or airway inflammation. Moreover, cough frequency and airflow obstruction represent independent dimensions of asthma control.

Whole-Body Plethysmography in Suspected Asthma: A Prospective Study of Its Added Diagnostic Value in 302 Patients

BACKGROUND

Whole-body plethysmography (WBP) with bronchial challenge testing to measure the (specific) airway resistance, (s)R(AW), is considered to be a more sensitive diagnostic procedure than spirometry, which can only measure the forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1). The evidence for the added diagnostic value of WBP is not yet conclusive.

METHODS

In a prospective diagnostic study, we carried out WBP with bronchial challenge testing as well as a bronchodilation test in 400 patients with suspected asthma from June 2010 to October 2011. The bronchial provocation test was considered positive if the FEV1 fell by at least 20% and/or the airway resistance doubled, with an increase of the sR(AW) to at least 2.0 kPA × s and/or of the R(AW) to 0.5 kPA × s/L. Follow-up evaluation was performed one year later.

RESULTS

The prevalence of asthma in the 302 patients who completed follow-up was 27.5%. The sensitivity of WBP with sR(AW) measurement for asthma was 95.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 88.3%-98.1%), and its specificity was 81.7% (95% CI 76.1%-86.3%). The sensitivity of FEV1 was 44.6% (95% CI 34.4%-55.3%), and its specificity was 91.3% (95% CI 86.6%-94.4%). The negative predictive value (NPV) of WBP with sR(AW) measurement was 97.8% (95% CI 94.5%-99.1%), while that of FEV1 was 81.3% (95% CI 76.0%-85.7%). The positive predictive value (PPV) of WBP with sR(AW) measurement was 66.4% (95% CI 57.5%-74.2%), while that of FEV1 was 66.1% (95% CI 53.0%-77.1%).

CONCLUSION

With sR(AW) measurement, asthma can be ruled out with high certainty. Improving the positive predictive value of testing for asthma remains a challenge, however, as sR(AW) measurement does not yield any increase in specificity.

[Bronchial hyperresponsiveness and its importance for the clinician]

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airway disease, characterised by bronchial hyperresponsiveness causing bronchoconstriction, and thereby provoking typical symptoms (dyspnoea, cough, wheezing). Bronchial hyperres- ponsiveness indicates a temporary airflow limitation when exposed to a bronchoconstricting stimulus. Its measurement by challenge tests can be a valuable tool for confirming or excluding asthma, as well as for evaluating the efficacy of treatment. However, the origin of bronchial hyperresponsiveness is multifactorial and the different challenge tests are not equivalent. Direct challenge tests, like methacholine, mainly reflect chronic airway remo- delling, whereas indirect tests, like mannitol, better reflect bronchial inflammation.

Evolution of occupational asthma: does cessation of exposure really improve prognosis?

AIM

To assess the evolution of occupational asthma (OA) depending on whether the patient avoids or continues with exposure to the offending agent.

METHODS

Study in patients diagnosed with OA using a specific inhalation challenge. Patients underwent the following examinations on the same day: clinical interview, physical examination, forced spirometry, methacholine test and determination of total IgE. Clinical improvement, deterioration or no change were defined according to the changes seen on the GINA severity scale at the time of diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of the 73 patients finally included, 55 had totally ended exposure and 18 continued to be exposed at work. Clinical improvement was observed in 47% of those who had terminated exposure and in 22% of those who remained exposed; clinical deterioration was observed in 14% and 17% respectively (p = 0.805). Logistical regression analysis, including the type of agent and the persistence or avoidance of exposure among the variables, did not show any predictive factors of clinical evolution. Similarly, the changes in FEV1 and in bronchial hyperresponsiveness were not associated with the avoidance or continuation of exposure to the causative agent.

CONCLUSIONS

Avoiding exposure to the causative agent in patients with OA does not seem to improve prognosis in this disease. Despite these findings, there is insufficient evidence to recommend a change in current management guidelines.

Phase-contrast MRI for detection of mild systemic hemodynamic response after segmental allergen challenge in asthmatic patients

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Detection of a systemic hemodynamic response in patients suffering from allergic asthma after segmental endobronchial allergen challenge using phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine asthma patients and four healthy volunteers were examined using MRI (1.5T) before (0 hour), 6 hours, and 24 hours after segmental allergen challenge. Two-dimensional phase-contrast MRI measurements were performed in the aorta (AO) and in the pulmonary artery (PA). In addition, short-axis balanced steady state free precession cardiac cine MRI was performed. Maximum systolic flow, maximum flow acceleration, acceleration volume, acceleration time, distensibility, ejection fraction, stroke volume, end-systolic/diastolic volume, cardiac mass, heart rate (HR), and cardiac output (CO) were determined. Spirometry and bronchoalveolar lavage were also performed.

RESULTS

In patients with asthma, maximal systolic flow and maximal flow acceleration increased 6 hours after provocation in the AO (112.3% and 118.9%, respectively) and PA (113.9% and 116.0%, respectively) compared to baseline (100%, P < .05). HR and CO increased significantly at 6 hours (115% and 118%, respectively) compared to baseline (100%, P = .003). In healthy subjects, almost all MRI-derived hemodynamic parameters did not significantly change at 6 hours and were significantly lower than baseline values at 24 hours (P < .02). Twenty-four hours after allergen challenge, all MRI-derived flow parameters were significantly lower in the control group compared to the asthma group (P < .05). HR, CO, and cardiac function parameters measured at 24 hours showed no significant difference comparing the two groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In asthmatic patients, MRI-derived hemodynamic parameters using phase-contrast MRI are slightly altered after segmental allergen provocation compared to normal controls indicating a mild systemic reaction to local allergen challenge.

Airway hyperresponsiveness and development of lung function in adolescence and adulthood

BACKGROUND

Long-term longitudinal studies of lung function from childhood to adulthood are important in linking our understanding of childhood risk factors to adult disease. Airway hyperresponsiveness has been shown to independently affect lung function growth in studies of adolescence. The objective of the study was to test the hypothesis that airway hyperresponsiveness has an independent deleterious effect on lung function in adolescence that extends into adulthood.

METHODS

A random population sample (n = 983) aged 7-17 from Copenhagen was followed longitudinally for 20 years with four examinations.

RESULTS

A total of 780 (79.3%) subjects contributed with lung function measurements and bronchial provocation testing. Among these, 170 (21.8%) had airway hyperresponsiveness at one examination or more during the study period. There was no difference in initial FEV1 levels between subjects with and without airway hyperresponsiveness. In a repeated measures regression model with adjustment for asthma and smoking, airway hyperresponsiveness was independently associated with reduced rates of growth in lung function in both sexes of 23 ml/year. Reduced growth rates resulted in deficits in maximal attained level of lung function at age 18, which persisted throughout the follow-up until the last examination at age 27-37 years.

CONCLUSION

Airway hyperresponsiveness has an independent deleterious effect on lung function development from 7 to 37 years resulting in a lower maximal attained lung function and persistent deficits in lung function in adulthood.

Effects of inhaled corticosteroids on the dual asthmatic response

Bronchial asthma patients develop various asthmatic response types to allergen challenge, such as immediate asthmatic response (IAR), late asthmatic response (LAR), or dual asthmatic response (DAR), the latter being a combination of an early phase (IAR) and a late phase (LAR). This study was designed to investigate (1) the features of the DAR thus identifying it as either a genuine two-phase compact clinical entity or a simultaneous appearance of two independent asthmatic response types, IAR and LAR, and (2) the protective effects of inhaled budesonide (BUD) on the DAR. Two protection tests (PTs) with BUD and a placebo (PL), in a single dose of 800 micrograms, were performed on 48 DAR patients, divided into four groups. Each test consisted of two treatments, one given 30 minutes before and the other at 1, 2, 3, or 4 hours after the bronchial challenge with allergen. The study design was randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-matched, crossover. A single dose of inhaled BUD did not affect the early phase (IAR) when applied 30 minutes before the challenge (p > 0.2), whereas it significantly prevented the late phase (LAR) when administered either 30 minutes before (p < 0.001) or up to 4 hours after the allergen challenge (p < 0.05). The different protective effects of BUD on both of the phases of DAR would suggest that this response does not exist as a compact clinical entity, but it may be a manifestation of two independent simultaneous responses, IAR and LAR, because of different immunologic mechanisms. Inhaled corticosteroids in a single dose administered shortly before or up to 4 hours after the allergen exposure contribute significantly to the prevention of the LAR, whereas they are unable to affect the IAR.

[Respiratory functional changes in pulmonary tuberculosis]

OBJECTIVES

The main objective of the study is to identify changes that occur in lung function in patients with pulmonary TB. The secondary objective is to determine the characteristics of bronchial obstruction associated with pulmonary TB.

METHODS

There were included in the study patients with pulmonary TB diagnosed in Bacau Pneumology Hospital between January 2011 and March 2012. Data was collected on gender, age, origin, education, occupation, smoking, and TB case category. Expansion of lung lesions was assessed on chest radiographs. Lung function was measured by spirometry and bronchodilatator test.

RESULTS

The study group included 84 patients with a mean age of 44.9 years, predominantly male (86.9%6) and rural (61.9%). Investigation revealed that smoking status was 23.81% nonsmoking, 22.62% former smokers and 53.57% smokers. 64.29% of patients were new cases of pulmonary TB, 15.47% relapse and 20.24% patients with chronic pulmonary TB. Assessment of ventilatory function found 58.33% of patients with respiratory defects. These were mainly restrictive (33.33%), mixed (17.86%) and obstructive (7.14%). Obstructive and mixed ventilatory defects are significantly associated with age over 40 years (chi2 = 4.70, r = 0.419, p = 0.036, 95% CI), male gender (chi2 = 8.14, r = 0.688, p = 0.027, 95% CI), smoking (chi2 = 11.251, r = 0.758, p = 0.032, 95% CI), category of chronic case of TB (chi2 = 11.25, r = 0.475, p = 0.0008, 95% CI) and radiological lung lesions extension (chi2 = 8.128, r = 0.658, p = 0.01293, 95% CI).

CONCLUSIONS

Pulmonary TB is often associated wit significant functional changes, present since the early stages of the disease and which are often ignored. Early detection and proper treatment of TB could contribute to reducing the incidence of ventilatory defects associated with TB, and their rapid detection would allow better monitoring and thus improved quality of life of these patients. Extensive, multicenter, longitudinal studies are necessary to investigate and deepen knowledge of the functional consequences of tuberculosis.

Validation of the Human Ozone Challenge Model as a Tool for Assessing Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Early Development

This study aimed to test the utility of the ozone challenge model for profiling novel compounds designed to reduce airway inflammation. The authors used a randomized, double-dummy, double-blind, placebo-controlled 3-period crossover design alternating single orally inhaled doses of fluticasone propionate (inhaled corticosteroids, 2 mg), oral prednisolone (oral corticosteroids, 50 mg), or matched placebo. At a 2-week interval, 18 healthy ozone responders (>10% increase in sputum neutrophils) underwent a 3-hour ozone (250 ppb)/intermittent exercise challenge starting 1 hour after drug treatment. Airway inflammation was assessed at 2 hours (breath condensate) and 3 hours (induced sputum) after ozone challenge. Compared to placebo, pretreatment with inhaled corticosteroids or oral corticosteroids resulted in a significant reduction (mean [95% confidence interval]) of sputum neutrophils by 62% (35%, 77%) and 64% (39%, 79%) and of sputum supernatant myeloperoxidase by 55% (41%, 66%) and 42% (25%, 56%), respectively. The authors conclude that an optimized ozone challenge model (including ozone responders and ensuring adequate drug levels during exposure) may be useful for testing novel anti-inflammatory compounds in early development.

The interest of FEF(25-75) in evaluating bronchial hyperresponsiveness with the methacholine test

BACKGROUND

Bronchial hyperresponsiveness is the pathogenic basis of asthma, and measurement of its intensity is investigated using the methacholine provocation test, which not only and particularly evaluates the reduction in FEV1 (PD20) but also takes forced mid-expiratory flow or FEF(25-75) (PD40) into account. The present study aims to evaluate the usefulness of both parameters.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Provocation testing was carried out in 151 patients between 7 and 22 years of age diagnosed with asthma, tracheobronchitis and/or rhinitis, using a short method that allows quantification of the methacholine administered. The subjects were divided into three groups according to the amount of methacholine needed to obtain the mentioned parameters (group 1: ≤1000μg; group 2: 1001-2000μg; group 3: ≥2001μg).

RESULTS

Greater variability was recorded for FEF(25-75) than for FEV1. Paired comparison among the three groups for FEV1 proved significant, in the same way as for FEF(25-75) between groups 2 and 3, and 1 and 3, but not between groups 1 and 2. Calculation was made of the amount of methacholine required to obtain PD20 and PD40 from the same dose. Only the significant differences corresponded to the comparison of group 1 versus the rest, with no differences between the means of the total mean values.

CONCLUSIONS

The utility of PD20 is more evident, considering the variability of PD40; the latter may be useful in patients with rhinitis or tracheobronchitis when PD20 proves scantly demonstrative.

Nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea reflect nonspecific nasal hyper-reactivity as evaluated by cold dry air provocation

CONCLUSION

Nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, and the amount of rhinorrhea that confidently reflect the parasympathetic stimulation can be used to more precisely predict nonspecific nasal hyper-reactivity (NHR).

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to identify factors that confidently reflected the presence and the degree of NHR, measured by cold dry air (CDA) provocation and acoustic rhinometry.

METHODS

A total of 156 patients with allergic or non-allergic rhinitis were classified into three groups according to the decrease of minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) after CDA provocation (group A: n = 40, MCA decrease >60%; group B: n = 29, MCA decrease 30-60%; group C: n = 87, MCA decrease <29%). Symptom scores using the visual analog scale (VAS) were obtained before and after CDA provocation. Changes of VAS were compared between groups. The amount of rhinorrhea was measured after CDA provocation.

RESULTS

VAS scores for nasal obstruction, rhinorrhea, and sneezing were significantly higher in groups A and B than in group C before and after CDA provocation. Change of nasal obstruction and rhinorrhea was significantly larger in group A compared with group B or C. There were also significant differences in the amount of rhinorrhea between groups. All these parameters significantly correlated with the change of MCA values after CDA provocation.

Leukotriene D4 bronchial provocation test: methodology and diagnostic value

BACKGROUND

Although leukotriene D4 (LTD4) is a potent bronchoconstrictor, little is known about airway responsiveness to LTD4 in asthmatics with different inflammation phenotypes.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the methodology and investigate the distribution characters of airway responsiveness, diagnostic value and safety of LTD4 bronchial provocation test.

METHODS

LTD4 bronchial provocation tests were performed in 62 asthmatics and 21 normal controls. Airway responsiveness was assessed based on the cumulative dosage causing a 20% fall in FEV(1) (PD(20)FEV(1)-LTD4) and was expressed as (median, interquartile range). The fall in spirometric parameters was plotted showing the distribution characters. The diagnostic value was assessed using receiver operation characteristic (ROC) curve. All adverse events were recorded during the test.

RESULTS

Airway responsiveness to LTD4 was significantly higher in asthmatics (0.410 nmol, 0.808 nmol) as compared with normal controls (5.00 nmol, 0.00 nmol). The decrease in spirometric parameters varied after bronchoprovocation, which was negatively correlated with PD(20)FEV(1)-LTD4, among which FEV(1) had a maximal slope (r = -0.524, P = 0.000). High diagnostic value (AUC: 0.914, 95%CI: [0.855, 0.974]) was revealed by ROC curve. The major adverse events were dyspnea (82.3%), chest tightness (72.6%), wheezing (32.3%) and coughing (25.8%) in asthmatics, which could overall be recovered within 15.0 minutes after inhalation of 200 ∼ 400 mcg salbutamol MDI. No serious adverse event was reported.

CONCLUSION

The established procedure of LTD4 bronchial provocation test is effective in the diagnosis of asthma and is well tolerated. Future studies are necessary to provide more evidences in terms of safety and efficacy. This may be helpful upon further application in clinical practice.

Description of a specific bronchial provocation test for the diagnosis of occupational asthma due to platinum salts

BACKGROUND

Occupational exposure to platinum salts may cause the onset of skin and respiratory disorders with an IgE-mediated allergic mechanism. The diagnosis of occupational asthma due to platinum salts was, in a small number of cases, achieved also via occupational specific bronchial provocation tests (sBPT), which until now were conducted by pouring platinum salt dusts from one tray to another or by direct aerosoling of hexachloroplatinate solutions into the patient's airways.

METHODS

Here we describe an original occupational sBPT based on atomization of solutions of ammonium hexachloroplatinate, at increasing concentrations, in a 5 m3 challenge room: the starting solution is a 1:100 dilution of the preset threshold of the patient's skin reactivity to the substance. In the absence of a bronchoconstrictive response, the following concentration is atomized (each time 10 times higher than the previous one), until the maximum concentration, 10(-2) M, is reached. The patient is not in the challenge room during atomization of the solutions, but enters when this operation has been completed and remains there for 15 minutes, unless he/she shows signs of respiratory trouble before that time. After each exposure, the patient is clinically monitored, with respiratory function tests at preset times, until at least 8 hours after the end of the exposure.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The test allowed identifying a respiratory hypersensitivity specifically to platinum as cause of asthma in two precious metal workers, with the onset of immediate bronchospasm in one patient and biphasic bronchospasm in the other. Compared to the sBPT by pouring a mixture of platinum salt dusts from one tray to another, the method we designed offers a better standardization of bronchial stimulation and, compared to direct aerosoling of hexachloroplatinate into the patient's airways, it has the advantage of reproducing the respiratory risk conditions occurring in the workplace and offers better safety guarantees for the patient, since it reduces the risk of onset of serious asthmatic or even systemic responses in subjects highly hypersensitive to this metal.

A bovine model of respiratory Chlamydia psittaci infection: challenge dose titration

This study aimed to establish and evaluate a bovine respiratory model of experimentally induced acute C. psittaci infection. Calves are natural hosts and pathogenesis may resemble the situation in humans. Intrabronchial inoculation of C. psittaci strain DC15 was performed in calves aged 2–3 months via bronchoscope at four different challenge doses from 10⁶ to 10⁹ inclusion-forming units (ifu) per animal. Control groups received either UV-inactivated C. psittaci or cell culture medium. While 10⁶ ifu/calf resulted in a mild respiratory infection only, the doses of 10⁷ and 10⁸ induced fever, tachypnea, dry cough, and tachycardia that became apparent 2–3 days post inoculation (dpi) and lasted for about one week. In calves exposed to 10⁹ ifu C. psittaci, the respiratory disease was accompanied by severe systemic illness (apathy, tremor, markedly reduced appetite). At the time point of most pronounced clinical signs (3 dpi) the extent of lung lesions was below 10% of pulmonary tissue in calves inoculated with 10⁶ and 10⁷ ifu, about 15% in calves inoculated with 10⁸ and more than 30% in calves inoculated with 10⁹ ifu C. psittaci. Beside clinical signs and pathologic lesions, the bacterial load of lung tissue and markers of pulmonary inflammation (i.e., cell counts, concentration of proteins and eicosanoids in broncho-alveolar lavage fluid) were positively associated with ifu of viable C. psittaci. While any effect of endotoxin has been ruled out, all effects could be attributed to infection by the replicating bacteria. In conclusion, the calf represents a suitable model of respiratory chlamydial infection. Dose titration revealed that both clinically latent and clinically manifest infection can be reproduced experimentally by either 10⁶ or 10⁸ ifu/calf of C. psittaci DC15 while doses above 10⁸ ifu C. psittaci cannot be recommended for further studies for ethical reasons. This defined model of different clinical expressions of chlamydial infection allows studying host-pathogen interactions.

Extended diagnostic criteria used for indirect challenge testing in elite asthmatic swimmers

The aim of the study was to investigate the prevalence of asthma with or without exercise induced symptoms among elite and elite aspiring swimmers and to compare sport specific exercise provocation with mannitol provocation.

METHODS

101 adolescent swimmers were investigated with mannitol provocation and sport specific exercise challenge test. Mannitol positivity was defined as either direct FEV(1) PD15 (ordinary criteria) or as β(2)-reversibility ≥15% after challenge (extended criteria). A direct positive exercise test was defined as a drop in FEV(1) of 10% (ordinary criteria) or a difference in FEV of ≥15% either spontaneous, variability, or with β2-agonist, reversibility (extended criteria).

RESULTS

We found a high prevalence of mannitol and/or exercise positivity. Twenty-six swimmers were mannitol direct positive and 14 were direct exercise positive using ordinary criteria. Using extended criteria 43 were mannitol positive and 24 were exercise positive. When including reversibility and variability to define a positive test the sensitivity for current asthma with or without exercise induced symptoms increased while the specificity remained roughly unchanged. Direct positivity for mannitol and exercise poorly overlapped using ordinary criteria but improved using extended criteria.

CONCLUSION

We found a high prevalence of asthma among elite swimmers. The use of variability and reversibility (liability) as additional criteria to define a positive test provided to our mind relevant information and should be considered.

Bronchodilation test in patients with allergic rhinitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) may be considered a risk factor for the onset of asthma. Recently, it has been reported that forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of vital capacity (FEF₂₅₋₇₅) may predict a positive response to bronchodilation test in asthmatic children. The aim of this study was to evaluate a large group of adult AR patients to investigate the frequency of response to bronchodilation test and FEF₂₅₋₇₅ values.

METHODS

One thousand four hundred and sixty-nine consecutive patients suffering from persistent AR were evaluated. Clinical examination, spirometry, and bronchodilation test were performed in all patients.

RESULTS

In this study, 62.9% of patients had reversibility to bronchodilation test and 17.8% had impaired FEF₂₅₋₇₅ values (≤ 65% of predicted). Impaired FEF₂₅₋₇₅ values associated with longer rhinitis duration may predict reversibility to bronchodilation test (OR = 11.3; P < 0.001). In addition, a FEF₂₅₋₇₅ cutoff value ≤ 71% of predicted may already discriminate patients with reversibility.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights that about two-thirds of patients with persistent AR may be considered at risk of becoming asthmatic. This finding should be adequately considered as a precocious spirometry may allow the early detection of patients prone to develop asthma and consequently to treat them.

[Usefulness of selected tests in the diagnosis of exercise induced bronchoconstriction]

INTRODUCTION

Indirect airway challenge tests are commonly used in the diagnosis of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB), defined as a post-exercise decrease in FEV(1) ≥ 10%. The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of bronchial hyperreactivity tests in the diagnosis of EIB.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Forty two subjects were allocated to 3 groups: A - 19 steroid naive asthma patients; D - 11 no-asthma patients reporting symptoms suggestive for EIB (dyspnea, wheeze and cough provoked by exercise) and K - 12 healthy controls. Subjects filled a questionnaire regarding symptoms related to exercise and underwent: inhaled bronchial challenge to methacholine (Mch), adenosine 5'-monophosphate (AMP) and exercise challenge on a treadmill. With a cutoff of ≥ 10% or ≥ 15% decrease in FEV1 post exercise EIB was diagnosed in 47% and 37% of asthma patients, respectively; 27% of subjects in group D and in none of controls, irrespectively of the ΔFEV(1) criterion.

RESULTS

The analysis of questionnaire revealed that a single symptom cannot be used to predict EIB. Symptoms occurring after termination of exercise, but not during exercise characterize EIB more precisely. The analysis showed that the most useful measure to diagnose EIB can be a combination of bronchial challenge to AMP and typical symptoms of exercise induced bronchoconstriction (i.e. dyspnea, wheezes and cough provoked by exercise) with a sensitivity of 70%, specifity of 94%, PPV of 78%, NPV of 91% and LR of 11.2.

CONCLUSIONS

Symptoms suggestive of EIB do not have acceptable sensitivity and specifity for the diagnosis of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. The most useful measure to diagnose EIB is a combination of typical symptoms of EIB with positive challenge to AMP.

[Specific challenge tests in occupational asthma--guidelines by the Finnish Expert Group on Occupational Lung Diseases]

In a specific inhalation challenge (SIC) test the patient inhales an occupational agent in controlled environment and the subsequent asthmatic reaction is monitored. SIC is considered as the reference standard when confirming the diagnosis of sensitizer-induced occupational asthma. However, SIC is not always needed for the diagnosis; in many cases the causal relationship between an occupational agent and asthma can be shown also with serial peak flow measurements and specific immunologic testing. SIC is invaluable in identifying new occupational airway sensitizers. This is essential for preventing occupational asthma in the future.

Bronchial provocation tests in clinical practice

Bronchial hyperresponsiveness, which consists of an exaggerated response of the airways to bronchoconstrictor stimuli, is one of the main characteristics of asthma, presented in nearly all asthmatic patients. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness may also be present in other diseases, such as allergic rhinitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cystic fibrosis, heart failure and respiratory infection, and with some medications, such as β-blockers. Bronchial provocation tests (also known as bronchial challenges) are used to evaluate bronchial responsiveness. These tests have become increasingly used over the last 20 years, with the development and validation of accurate, safe and reproducible tests, and with the publication of well-detailed protocols. Several stimuli can be used in a bronchial challenge, and they are classified as direct and indirect stimuli. There are many indications for a bronchial challenge. In this review, we discuss the main differences between direct and indirect stimuli, and the use of bronchial challenges in clinical practice, especially for confirming diagnoses of asthma, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction and cough-variant asthma, and for use among elite-level athletes.

Mannitol as an indirect bronchoprovocation test for the 21st century

OBJECTIVES

To review mannitol challenge data and advocate the approval of this testing modality in the United States.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review was performed using the MEDLINE database for English-language articles published between January 1, 1993, and July 31, 2009, using the following keywords: mannitol bronchoprovocation test, inhaled mannitol, inhaled mannitol and asthma, and inhaled mannitol and exercise-induced asthma.

STUDY SELECTION

Trials were selected that established the effect of mannitol as a bronchoprovocation challenge, explored mannitol's mechanism of action, and compared mannitol to other accepted bronchoprovocation challenges.

RESULTS

Mannitol has demonstrated the ability to detect airway hyperreactivity in individuals. The mechanism of action is through the release of mast cell mediators. The sensitivity and specificity compare well with other indirect challenge testing methods.

CONCLUSION

Mannitol is a polyol sugar that can be converted to a powdered form and encapsulated. Once encapsulated it can be inhaled and causes narrowing of the airways in susceptible individuals. Mannitol likely triggers the release of inflammatory and/or bronchospasm mediators, causing the smooth muscle of the airway to contract and resulting in airway narrowing. The magnitude of decrease in forced expiratory volume in 1 second and the dose of mannitol needed to provoke the airway response provide a readily measurable and clinically useful assessment of airway hyperreactivity. Mannitol challenge is an accepted testing method in Australia, Europe, and Korea. Acceptance of the mannitol challenge in the United States would complement existing methods for assessing bronchial hyperreactivity and likely improve patient care.

Assessing the effectiveness of intubation as a challenge model in contagious bovine pleuropneumonia vaccine experiments

A study was carried out to assess the effectiveness of a bronchoscope in administering a pathogenic field strain of Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. mycoides (MmmSC) in cattle challenge experiments. Out of 16 animals inoculated using the bronchoscope, 10 (62.2%) showed clinical disease as evidenced by fever and 15 (93.8%) displayed typical lesions of CBPP from which MmmSC was isolated. Serum samples collected weekly were tested by Complement Fixation Test (CFT) and competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (c-ELISA). Antibodies to MmmSC were detected in 10 out of the 16 animals by the CFT and 11 out of the 16 animals by c-ELISA. The onset of clinical disease was as early as 2 days post-inoculation, and most of the animals developed clinical disease 2 to 3 weeks post-infection. These results clearly demonstrate that nasotracheal inoculation of pathogenic strain of MmmSC with the aid of a bronchoscope can lead to early onset of clinical disease; similar to previous studies but with higher numbers of animals showing clinical disease. This is in contrast with previous studies where early clinical disease was observed in as little as 15% of inoculated animals. This nasotracheal inoculation method using a bronchoscope can, therefore, be adopted for use in experimental challenge infections of cattle. This method is found to be a better replacement to the contact transmission method whose drawback includes extra cost of donor animals and unpredictable rate and timing of transmission from intubated to challenge animals.

[The detection of biphasic reactivity of the airway by astograph]

Dose-related curves of the airway responses to Methacholine by Astograph are frequently biphasic. That is, respiratory resistance (Rrs) increases slowly at first and rapidly after that. We proposed (-dGrs/dt)/Grs obtained by using Astograph as an index of dynamic property of the airway, which we suggested was related to a coefficient of the contraction or dilatation of the airway. Grs represents respiratory conductance. By calculating (-dGrs/dt)/Grs, we found that biphasic dose-related curves were composed of the slow and subsequently rapid contraction of the airways. And by mathematical analysis, we found that all segments of the airway contracted simultaneously at a uniform velocity. The combination of slow and rapid contraction explains three types of the airway responses, that is, the monophasic reactivity of the airway with slow contraction, the monophasic reactivity of the airway with rapid contraction and the biphasic reactivity of the airway with slow and subsequently rapid contraction. We found that the frequency of the monophasic reactivity of the airway with slow contraction was significantly higher in patients with COPD than in healthy subjects or in patients with mild asthma. But there was no significant difference in (-dGrs/dt)/Grs values among healthy subjects, patients with mild asthma and patients with COPD.

Exercise-induced airway obstruction in young asthmatics measured by impulse oscillometry

BACKGROUND

Impulse oscillometry (IOS) is a good method for measuring airway resistance. It does not require special breathing skills and it can reflect different aspects of airway obstruction to those revealed by spirometry, which is an effort-dependent maneuver.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the characteristics of airway obstruction in young asthmatics after an exercise bronchial provocation test (EBPT) using IOS.

METHODS

Forty-seven young adults were enrolled in the study. All the participants underwent a methacholine bronchial provocation test (MBPT) and an EBPT for the evaluation of their asthma. IOS and spirometric parameters were collected at baseline and at 0, 5, 10, 20, and 30 minutes post-EBPT.The participants were divided into 2 groups according to MBPT positivity: an airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) group and a no-AHR group.

RESULTS

There were differences in the percent decrease in forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) between the 2 groups at 5, 10, and 20 minutes after exercise. Resistance at 5 Hz (R5) increased in the AHR group but not in the no-AHR group at 5 and 10 minutes after exercise. Integration of reactance from 5 Hz to resonance frequency (area of reactance, AX) was also increased in the AHR group at only 5 and 10 minutes post-EBPT. Delta R5 and delta AX at 5 and 10 minutes post-exercise were well correlated with the percent decrease in FEV1.

CONCLUSIONS

IOS parameters, especially delta R5 and delta AX, may be useful for performing objective evaluations and improving our understanding of exercise-induced airway obstruction in young asthmatics.

[Recent development in animal testing to predict the skin and respiratory sensitizing potential of chemicals]

The identification of chemicals with skin and/or respiratory sensitizing potential is important for the prevention of allergic diseases in both living and work environments. Although a number of animal models for respiratory allergic diseases have been reported, none of these models meets the goals of broad assessments of chemical sensitizing potential. We are attempting to develop a test for predicting the respiratory sensitization of chemicals. In the evaluation of skin sensitization of chemicals, the mostly used predictive tests are the guinea pig maximization test, Buehler test, and mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA). However, only LLNA has been validated formally and independently. Recent studies have revealed that EC3 estimated by LLNA correlates well with human skin sensitizing potency and the threshold for the induction of skin sensitization in the human repeat patch test. Thus, LLNA can predict the potency of skin sensitizing potential of a chemical and its risk in humans.

Assessment of airway hyperreactivity: comparison of forced spirometry and body plethysmography for methacholine challenge tests

INTRODUCTION

Bronchial challenge tests by inhalation of aerosolized methacholine (MCH) are commonly used in the clinical diagnosis of airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR). While the detection of airway narrowing relies on the patient's cooperation performing forced spirometry, body plethysmographic measurements of airway resistance are less depending on the patient's cooperation and do not alter the respiratory tract by maximal maneuvers. Hence we compared both methods concerning their clinical value and correlation during MCH challenges in patients with asthma.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Cumulative MCH challenges test, consisting of up to 5 steps, evaluated with body plethysmography on each step were performed in 155 patients with bronchial asthma. Airway responses were recorded at each step of MCH application (MasterScreen Body, Cardinal Health, Höchberg). At the baseline test and after crossing the provocation dose (PD) threshold in body plethysmography (PD+100 sReff), forced expirations were performed and FEV(1), FVC, and FEV(1) %FVC were measured. Using regression analysis of the airway parameters and taking the MCH dose as the covariate, we could extrapolate to missing spirometric values and interpolate the estimated MCH dose when crossing the PD threshold (PD-20 FEV(1)) between two consecutive measurements. The administered PD+100 MCH doses for specific airway resistance, sRtot, and sReff were compared with resistance parameters Rtot and Reff, and to PD-20 of FEV(1) and FEV(1) %FVC.

RESULTS

Regarding sReff we found a mild, moderate, or severe AHR in 114 patients (75%), but only 50 (32%) according to FEV1. A statistical analysis showed strongly linear correlated parameters of airway resistance, but no significant correlation between the results of body plethysmography and forced spirometry.

CONCLUSIONS

Using MCH challenges, we found specific airway resistance to be the most sensitive parameter to detect AHR. Raw is largely independent of height and gender facilitating the interpretation of measurements carried out longitudinally.