Journals / Toraks Dergisi / 2003 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2

Differences in responsiveness of asthmatic airways to direct and indirect stimuli

Astımda direkt ve indirekt uyaranlara yanıt farklılıkları

Pages
161–167
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In our study population A MP bronchoprovocation was found to be a more appropriate screening test and inflammatory marker differentiating asthma from healthy controls.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Increased bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) is an essential feature of asthma.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In order to assess the responsiveness of asthmatic airways to AMP and compare its diagnostic value with respect to methacholine challenge we performed methacholine and AMP bronchoprovocation tests in 22 asthmatics (19 women, 3 men; median age 34.77±15.38 yrs), 10 smoker and 11 nonsmoker healthy volunteers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In our study population A MP bronchoprovocation was found to be a more appropriate screening test and inflammatory marker differentiating asthma from healthy controls.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Sigara içme · Hava yolu tıkanıklığı · Metakolin klorid

Abstract

Increased bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) is an essential feature of asthma. In clinical studies methacholine challenge is generally used to measure BHR. However, adenosine monophosphate (AMP) - an indirect stimulus- has been suggested to be a better marker for airway inflammation since it is more closely related with asthmatic inflammatory processes. In order to assess the responsiveness of asthmatic airways to AMP and compare its diagnostic value with respect to methacholine challenge we performed methacholine and AMP bronchoprovocation tests in 22 asthmatics (19 women, 3 men; median age 34.77±15.38 yrs), 10 smoker and 11 nonsmoker healthy volunteers. For each type of challenge, sensitivity and specificity curves were constructed. Intersection points of these curves were used as cut-off points in differentiating asthmatics from controls. The median PC 20" values were as follows: asthmatics 3.39±5.02 mg/mL, smokers 39.17±22.23 mg/mL, nonsmokers 57.66±15.28 mg/mL for methacholine; asthmatics 44.73±85.30 mg/mL, smokers and nonsmokers 800±0 mg/ml for AMP. Methacholine distinguished asthmatics from smokers and nonsmokers with a sensitivity and specificity of 94%-96% at 6.8 mg/ml and 13 mg/mL concentrations, respectively. AMP distinguished asthmatics from both controls at 100 mg/mL concentration with 100% sensitivity and specificity. In our study population A MP bronchoprovocation was found to be a more appropriate screening test and inflammatory marker differentiating asthma from healthy controls.

Özet

Artmış hava yolu yanıtlılığı astımın temel fizyopatolojik özelliklerinden biridir. Klinikte direkt bir uyaran olan metakolin ile bronkoprovokasyon en sık kullanılan testtir. Ancak adenozin monofosfat (AMP) gibi indirekt uyaranların, astımın fizyopatolojisi ile daha yakın ilişkili olması nedeniyle daha duyarlı ve özgül olabilecekleri düşünülmektedir. Astımda bir indirekt uyaran olan AMP ile bronkoprovokasyonun metakoline tanısal üstünlüğü araştırıldı. 19'u kadın, 3'ü erkek, yaş ortalamaları 34.77±15.38 yıl olan 22 astımlı ile 11'i sigara içmeyen 10'u sigara içen sağlıklı kontrollere metakolin (0.0625-64 mg/mL) ve AMP (0.004-800 mg/mL) bronkoprovokasyonu uygulandı. Her provokasyon için özgüllük ve duyarlılık eğrileri çakıştırılarak astımı sağlıklılardan ayıran "cut-off" değerleri belirlendi. Ortalama PC20 metakolin astımlılarda 3.39±5.02 mg/mL, sigara içenlerde 39.17±22.23 mg/mL, sigara içmeyenlerde 57.66±15.28 mg/mL; PC20 AMP ise astımlılarda 44.73±85.30 mg/mL, sigara içen ve içmeyenlerde 800±0 mg/mL olarak bulundu. Özgüllük ve duyarlılık eğrileri çakıştırıldığında metakolin, astımlıları sigara içenlerden %94, sigara içmeyenlerden %96 özgüllük ve duyarlılık ile sırasıyla 6.8 mg/mL ve 13 mg/mL konsantrasyonlarında ayırdı. AMP ise astımlıları hem sigara içen hem de içmeyen sağlıklılardan %100 özgüllük ve duyarlılık ile 100 mg/mL'de ayırdı . AMP ile bronkoprovokasyonun inflamasyonun bir göstergesi olarak astımlıları sigara içen ve içmeyen sağlıklılardan ayırmada metakoline göre daha değerli olduğu düşünüldü.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARAAĞAÇ, G., ÇELİK, N., BAŞLILAR, Ş., YILMAZ, T. (2003). Differences in responsiveness of asthmatic airways to direct and indirect stimuli. Toraks Dergisi, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2, 161–167. https://ajindex.com/articles/368129

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (12)

  1. Weis EB, Stein M. Bronchial Asthma. Mechanisms and Therapeutics. 3rd ed. Boston: Little& Brown; 1993. 32-43
  2. Hughes JMB and Pride NB. Lung Function Tests. Physiological Principles and Clinical Applications. 1st ed. London: WB Saunders;1999. 219-33
  3. Pauwels R, Joos G, Van Der Straeten M. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness is not bronchial hyperresponsiveness is not bronchial asthma. Clin Allergy.1988;18:317-21
  4. Benckhuijsen J, van den Bos JW, van Velzen E, et al. Differences in the effect of allergen avoidance on bronchial hyperresponsiveness as measured by methacholine, adenosine 5¡¦ monophosphate and exercise in asthmatic children. Pediatr Pulmonol. 1996; 22: 147-53
  5. Prospenini G, Rey J-P, Rajakulasingam K et al. Effect of budesonide on AMP and methacholine airway responsiveness and sputum cellularity:a time-course study(abstract). Eur Respir J. 2001;163(S)
  6. Fowler S,Lipworth BJ.Association between atopic status and airway reactivity to methacholine and adenosine monophosphate(abstract). Eur Respir J.2001;102(S)
  7. Van Der Toorn L M, Overbeek SE, Prince J-B et al.Subjects in clinical remission of atopic asthma show normal dyspnea perception during methacholine and adenosine induced bronchoconstriction (abstract). Eur Respir J. 2001;46(S)
  8. DeMeer G, Heederik DJJ, Postma DS. Bronchial hyperresponsiveness to adenosine 5¡¦ monophosphate (AMP) is more strongly predicted by allergic airway disease than methacoline (abstract). Eur Respir J. 2000; 471(s)
  9. Phillips GD, NG WH, Church MK, Holgate ST. The response of plasma histamine to bronchoprovocation with methacholine, adenosine 5¡¦ monophosphate and allergen in atopic nonasthmatic subjects. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990; 141:9-13
  10. Okayama M., Ma J-Y, Matakoa I., et al. Role of vagal nerve activity on adenosine-induced bronchoconstriction in asthma. (abstract). Am Rev Respir Dis. 1986:133(Suppl): A93
  11. Avital A, Springer C, Bar-Yishay E, Godfrey S. Adenosine, methacholine, and exercise challenges in children with asthma or pediatric chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Thorax. 1995; 50:511-16. 12) van Velzen E, van den Bos JW, Benckhuijsen JA, et al. Effect of allergen avoidance at high altitude on direct and indirect bronchial hyperresponsiveness and markers of inflammation in children with allergic asthma. Thorax. 1996; 51: 582-4
  12. Van Der Berge M, Neijer R, Kerstjens HAM et al. PC20 adenosine 5¡¦ monophosphate is more closely associated with airway inflammation in asthma than PC20