Comparison of intermittent and continuous inhalation provocation tests

M. Ishii, W. Hida, S. Suzuki, M. Ichinose, H. Sasaki, T. Takishima

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

To improve standardization of inhalation provocation tests, two tests utilizing intermittent and continuous inhalation of methacholine aerosol were compared in five normal and ten asthmatic patients. During the intermittent inhalation test, methacholine aerosols with stepwise incremental concentrations were inhaled during tidal breathing for two minutes with a following 5-minute pause interval. Specific airway conductase (SGaw) and respiratory resistance (Rrs) were measured one-half, one and one-half, and five minutes after the end of each inhalation period. Specific airway conductance and Rrs were measured with the panting and forced oscillation methods, respectively. During the continuous inhalation test, the same stepwise incremental concentrations of methacholine aerosol were inhaled during tidal breathing for two minutes without a pause while Rrs was continuously measured. The cumulative dose of methacholine required to reduce SGaw by 35% of the baseline value (PD35 SGaw) during the intermittent inhalation test was significantly correlated with the cumulative methacholine dose required to reduce Grs (= 1/Rrs) by 35% of the baseline value during the continuous inhalation test (PD35 Grs) (r = .98). There was also a significant correlation between the slopes of the intermittent inhalation test and continuous inhalation test curves (r = .80). The results indicate that methacholine provocation can be measured as reliably using a simple continuous inhalation method as by a more complex intermittent one.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)223-228
Number of pages6
JournalAnnals of Allergy
Volume62
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - 1989

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of intermittent and continuous inhalation provocation tests'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this