EurekaMag.com logo
+ Site Statistics
References:
52,725,316
Abstracts:
28,411,598
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
EurekaMag Most Shared ContentMost Shared
EurekaMag PDF Full Text ContentPDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full TextRequest PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on FacebookFollow on Facebook
Follow on TwitterFollow on Twitter
Follow on Google+Follow on Google+
Follow on LinkedInFollow on LinkedIn

+ Translate

Development of a methacholine challenge method to minimize methacholine waste






Chest 124(4): 1522-1525

Development of a methacholine challenge method to minimize methacholine waste

Background: The standard 2-min tidal breathing methacholine challenge utilizes 3 mL to produce an output of 0.26 mL per 2 min, resulting in a substantial amount of methacholine being discarded. Objective: To develop a method with reduced methacholine waste and to compare it to the standard method. Methods: Twelve subjects with mild, well-controlled asthma volunteered for this investigation. They underwent three methacholine challenges in random order. The first challenge was the conventional 2-min tidal breathing method using 3 mL of doubling concentrations inhaled for 2 min at 5-min intervals. The first modification utilized 1.5 mL of quadrupling concentrations inhaled for 1 min and then 2 min, keeping the time interval constant at 3 min between completion of one inhalation and commencement of the next inhalation. The second modification utilized 1.5 mL of eightfold concentration step-ups inhaled for 30 s, 60 s, and 120 s with a time interval of 3 min between completion of one inhalation and commencement of the next inhalation. For each method, the provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in FEV1 (PC20) was calculated based on a 2-min equivalent-dose inhalation. Results: There was no significant difference in the geometric mean PC20 (1.5 mg/mL, 1.6 mg/mL, and 1.6 mg/mL for the three methods, respectively; p=0.47). The quadrupling concentration method was preferred because it was less subject to error than the other modification. Conclusion: The amount of methacholine discarded during a methacholine challenge can be reduced by two thirds by decreasing the volume from 3 to 1.5 mL, and by using quadrupling concentrations inhaled either with quadrupling-dose step-ups, or with doubling-dose step-ups by using sequential 1-min and 2-min inhalations.


Accession: 011944519

PMID: 14555588

DOI: 10.1378/chest.124.4.1522



Related references

Yong, S.C.; Smith, C.M.; Wach, R.; Kurian, M.; Primhak, R.A., 1999: Methacholine challenge in preschool children: methacholine-induced wheeze versus transcutaneous oximetry. Tracheal/chest auscultation for wheeze and transcutaneous oximetry have both been suggested as measures of outcome in bronchial provocation tests in young children. This study aimed to compare the sensitivity and safety of these two techniques as...

Dell, S.D.; Bola, S.S.; Foty, R.G.; Marshall, L.C.; Nelligan, K.A.; Coates, A.L., 2015: Provocative dose of methacholine causing a 20% drop in FEV1 should be used to interpret methacholine challenge tests with modern nebulizers. The American Thoracic Society guidelines (1999) for methacholine challenge tests (MCTs) using the 2-minute tidal breathing protocol were developed for the now-obsolete English-Wright (EW) nebulizer. In addition, the guideline recommendation to use...

Cohen, R.M.; Grant, W.; Lieberman, P.; Potter, W.; Golden, E.; Crawford, L.V.; Herrod, H.; Yoo, T.J., 1986: The use of methacholine inhalation, methacholine skin testing, distilled water inhalation challenge and eosinophil counts in the evaluation of patients presenting with cough and/or nonwheezing dyspnea. Twenty-four patients presenting with cough and/or nonwheezing dyspnea were evaluated with methacholine inhalation challenge (MC), distilled water inhalation challenge (DC), intracutaneous tests to varying concentrations of methacholine, total eosi...

Townley, R.G.; Hopp, R.J.; Rosenthal, R.R., 2007: The correct methacholine challenge delivery method?. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 119(4): 1026-7; Author Reply 1027-9

Wongtim, S.; Mogmud, S.; Chareonlap, P.; Phanuphak, P., 1994: Standardization of methacholine inhalation challenge by a reservoir method. Standardization of methacholine inhalation challenge (MIC) by a reservoir method was performed at Respiratory Unit, Chulalongkorn Hospital. One hundred subjects, including 20 non-smoking healthy subjects, 20 patients with isolated chronic cough, 2...

Sherrill D.L.; Martinez F.D.; Herbison G.P.; Sears M.R., 1992: An alternative method for describing methacholine challenge response curves. American Review of Respiratory Disease 145(4 PART 2): A706

Segura, C.; Prieto, L.; Lopez, V.; Barato, D.; Perez, C.; Marín, J., 2011: The effect of challenge method on methacholine-induced changes in sensitivity and air trapping. The methacholine challenge test performed with the tidal breathing method induces a greater fall in FEV(1) than the dosimeter method; however, the effect of the challenge method on methacholine-induced fall in FVC has not been investigated. To det...

Nieminen M.M., 1991: Methacholine bronchial challenge in clinical practice evaluation of a dosimeter method. American Review of Respiratory Disease 143(4 PART 2): A425

Knox, A.J.; Wisniewski, A.; Cooper, S.; Tattersfield, A.E., 1991: A comparison of the Yan and a dosimeter method for methacholine challenge in experienced and inexperienced subjects. Bronchial reactivity is being measured with increasing frequency in epidemiological studies, but there debate continues about the relative merits of the different methods used to measure reactivity, particularly for subjects with no previous exper...

Prieto, L.; Ferrer, A.; Domenech, J.; Pérez-Francés, C., 2006: Effect of challenge method on sensitivity, reactivity, and maximal response to methacholine. Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology 97(2): 175-181