Suppr超能文献

新型手持式设备检测呼出气一氧化氮。

Assessment of exhaled nitric oxide by a new hand-held device.

机构信息

Department of Pathophysiology, National Koranyi Institute for TB and Pulmonology, Budapest, Hungary.

出版信息

Respir Med. 2010 Sep;104(9):1377-80. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2010.06.005. Epub 2010 Jul 2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) has been implicated as a pulmonary biomarker. The aim of this study was to compare the performance of a new hand-held device to a standard chemiluminescence analyzer and to another portable device.

METHODS

FENO levels measured by NObreath (Bedfont) were compared to those of (1) a chemiluminescence detector (Logan, Logan Research) and (2) the electrochemical portable NIOX MINO (Aerocrine) in 18 healthy volunteers on three consecutive occasions: in the morning, 1 h and 24 h later.

RESULTS

Comparing FENO levels obtained by NObreath to those by Logan values were similar and a very close linear relationship was found between the two devices (r = 0.923, p < 0.001). The mean inter-device difference in FENO level was -3.45 ppb and the limits of agreement (Bland-Altman test) were -10.98 and 4.08 ppb. In the second series FENO levels obtained by NObreath were found to be slightly higher compared to those of NIOX MINO, but still showed a close correlation (r = 0.681, p < 0.001). The mean inter-device difference in FENO level was 4.36 ppb and the limits of agreement were -7.38 and 16.1 ppb. Analyzing the repeated FENO measurements, the mean coefficient of variation using NObreath tended to be lower than that of NIOX MINO (16.9 vs. 24.7%, p = 0.059), while it was similar as the value obtained with Logan (11.8 vs. 9.0%, p = 0.342).

CONCLUSIONS

FENO values measured with NObreath are reproducible and in good agreement with those obtained by NIOX MINO and Logan indicating that NObreath is suitable for use in clinical practice.

摘要

背景

分数呼出的一氧化氮(FENO)已被认为是一种肺部生物标志物。本研究的目的是比较新型手持式仪器与标准化学发光分析仪和另一种便携式仪器的性能。

方法

在三个连续的时间点(早晨、1 小时后和 24 小时后),将通过 NObreath(Bedfont)测量的 FENO 水平与(1)化学发光检测器(Logan,Logan Research)和(2)电化学便携式 NIOX MINO(Aerocrine)进行比较,共在 18 名健康志愿者中进行。

结果

NObreath 与 Logan 测量的 FENO 水平之间的比较相似,两种设备之间存在非常接近的线性关系(r = 0.923,p < 0.001)。FENO 水平的设备间平均差异为-3.45 ppb,一致性界限(Bland-Altman 检验)为-10.98 和 4.08 ppb。在第二个系列中,NObreath 测量的 FENO 水平略高于 NIOX MINO,但仍显示出密切的相关性(r = 0.681,p < 0.001)。FENO 水平的设备间平均差异为 4.36 ppb,一致性界限为-7.38 和 16.1 ppb。分析重复的 FENO 测量,使用 NObreath 的平均变异系数趋于低于 NIOX MINO(16.9%对 24.7%,p = 0.059),而与 Logan 相似(11.8%对 9.0%,p = 0.342)。

结论

NObreath 测量的 FENO 值具有可重复性,与 NIOX MINO 和 Logan 获得的值具有良好的一致性,表明 NObreath 适用于临床实践。

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