Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2004 Feb 15;169(4):473-8. Epub 2003 Nov 25.

Diagnosing asthma: comparisons between exhaled nitric oxide measurements and conventional tests.

Author information

1
Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago Medical School, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Abstract

International guidelines recommend a range of clinical tests to confirm the diagnosis of asthma. These focus largely on identifying variable airflow obstruction and responses to bronchodilator or corticosteroid. More recently, exhaled nitric oxide (FE(NO)) measurements and induced sputum analysis to assess airway inflammation have been highlighted. However, to date, no systematic comparisons to confirm the diagnostic utility of each of these methods have been performed. To do so, we investigated 47 consecutive patients with symptoms suggestive of asthma, using a comprehensive fixed-sequence series of diagnostic tests. Sensitivities and specificities were obtained for peak flow measurements, spirometry, and changes in these parameters after a trial of steroid. Comparisons were made against FE(NO) and sputum cell counts. Sensitivities for each of the conventional tests (0-47%) were lower than for FE(NO) (88%) and sputum eosinophils (86%). Overall, the diagnostic accuracy when using FE(NO) and sputum eosinophils was significantly greater. Results for conventional tests were not improved, using a trial of steroid. We conclude that FE(NO) measurements and induced sputum analysis are superior to conventional approaches, with exhaled nitric oxide being most advantageous because the test is quick and easy to perform.

PMID:
14644933
DOI:
10.1164/rccm.200310-1376OC
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Atypon
    Loading ...
    Support Center