Grosclaude M, Kofman J, Perrin-Fayolle M
Poumon Coeur. 1980;36(4):249-54.
The diagnosis of professional asthma raises problems that cannot be solved in many cases either by anamnestic data or by skin tests: realistic can then prove very useful. Reproducing in the laboratory the professional surroundings, these tests consist in studying the ventilatory variations induced by allergens inhaled during work. The authors report the results of these examinations done on 30 patients whose realistic tests were performed with controls of ventilatory variations by body plethysmography. Confirming the professional etiology of asthma was reached 16 times out of 30 by these tests. These substances concern: chemical products (9 cases), dust of plant or animal origin (4 cases), various saw dusts (2 cases), tissue extracts (1 case). These results enabled the authors to underline the interest of these tests which nevertheless have limits: a negative realistic test is not enough to eliminate this diagnosis, because it is not always possible to reproduce exactly the workshop atmosphere in the laboratory. On the contrary, a positive test does not necessarily mean that the asthma is truly and predominantly a professional asthma. Results must therefore always be interpreted in relation with the clinical context, although the mechanism involved is known to be variable. A positivity can be attributed to an allergic mechanism, a non immunological release of mediators, or simple irritative reactions. In spite of these draw-backs, realistic tests represent one of the best means of diagnosing professional asthma.
职业性哮喘的诊断会引发一些问题,在很多情况下,无论是通过既往病史数据还是皮肤试验都无法解决:此时,模拟工作环境测试可能会非常有用。这些测试是在实验室中重现职业环境,通过研究工作期间吸入过敏原引起的通气变化来进行的。作者报告了对30例患者进行这些检查的结果,这些患者的模拟工作环境测试采用体容积描记法控制通气变化。通过这些测试,30例中有16例确诊了哮喘的职业病因。这些物质包括:化学产品(9例)、植物或动物源性粉尘(4例)、各种锯末(2例)、组织提取物(1例)。这些结果使作者强调了这些测试的重要性,不过这些测试也有局限性:模拟工作环境测试呈阴性不足以排除该诊断,因为在实验室中并不总是能够精确重现车间环境。相反,阳性测试并不一定意味着哮喘确实主要是职业性哮喘。因此,尽管已知所涉及的机制是可变的,但结果始终必须结合临床情况进行解释。阳性结果可能归因于过敏机制、介质的非免疫性释放或单纯的刺激性反应。尽管有这些缺点,模拟工作环境测试仍是诊断职业性哮喘的最佳方法之一。