Suppr超能文献

阿司匹林诱发哮喘患者对鼻内赖氨酸-阿司匹林激发试验反应的可重复性

Reproducibility of response to nasal lysine-aspirin challenge in patients with aspirin-induced asthma.

作者信息

Lee Daniel K C, Haggart Kay, Lipworth Brian J

机构信息

Asthma & Allergy Research Group, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland.

出版信息

Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2004 Aug;93(2):185-8. doi: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)61473-1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and acoustic rhinometry objectively measure the effects of nasal provocation testing. Although the latter is conventionally used in nasal lysine-aspirin challenge, use of the former in aspirin-induced asthma (AIA) has never been evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the reproducibility of PNIF and acoustic rhinometry following nasal lysine-aspirin challenge in AIA.

METHODS

Fourteen patients with a clear-cut history of AIA underwent nasal lysine-aspirin challenge at 2 separate visits 1 week apart. Both PNIF and minimum cross-sectional area (MCA) were measured using acoustic rhinometry for 120 minutes following standard nasal lysine-aspirin challenge (25 mg).

RESULTS

Prechallenge values were not significantly different at visit 1 vs visit 2 for mean [SEM] PNIF (128 [13] vs 127 [9] L/min) and MCA (6.89 [0.51] vs 6.94 [0.57] cm2). The mean (SEM) maximum percent PNIF change from baseline for visit 1 and visit 2 was -42 (5) and -42 (6), respectively, and the mean (SEM) average percent PNIF change from baseline was -25 (4) and -25 (6), respectively. The mean (SEM) maximum percent MCA change from baseline for visit 1 and visit 2 was -49 (4) and -48 (3), respectively, and the mean (SEM) average percent MCA change from baseline was -25 (8) and -24 (4), respectively. Coefficients of variation for maximum and average responses were 2.3% and 6.5%, respectively, for PNIF and 7.4% and 16.1% for MCA.

CONCLUSIONS

Measurement of PNIF following nasal lysine-aspirin challenge is a simple and reproducible alternative to acoustic rhinometry, with maximum response being a more reproducible outcome measure than average response.

摘要

背景

鼻腔最大吸气流量(PNIF)和声反射鼻测量法可客观地测量鼻激发试验的效果。尽管声反射鼻测量法传统上用于赖氨酸阿司匹林鼻激发试验,但前者在阿司匹林诱发哮喘(AIA)中的应用从未得到评估。

目的

评估赖氨酸阿司匹林鼻激发试验后AIA患者PNIF和声反射鼻测量法的可重复性。

方法

14例有明确AIA病史的患者在相隔1周的2次独立就诊时接受赖氨酸阿司匹林鼻激发试验。在标准赖氨酸阿司匹林激发试验(25mg)后120分钟,使用声反射鼻测量法测量PNIF和最小横截面积(MCA)。

结果

第1次就诊和第2次就诊时,激发前平均[标准误]PNIF(128[13] vs 127[9]L/min)和MCA(6.89[0.51] vs 6.94[0.57]cm²)的数值无显著差异。第1次就诊和第2次就诊时,PNIF自基线变化的平均(标准误)最大百分比分别为-42(5)和-42(6),PNIF自基线变化的平均(标准误)平均百分比分别为-25(4)和-25(6)。第1次就诊和第2次就诊时,MCA自基线变化的平均(标准误)最大百分比分别为-49(4)和-48(3),MCA自基线变化的平均(标准误)平均百分比分别为-25(8)和-24(4)。PNIF最大和平均反应的变异系数分别为2.3%和6.5%,MCA分别为7.4%和16.1%。

结论

赖氨酸阿司匹林鼻激发试验后测量PNIF是声反射鼻测量法的一种简单且可重复的替代方法,最大反应比平均反应是更具可重复性的结果指标。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验