A comparison of sputum induction methods: Ultrasonic vs compressed-air nebulizer and hypertonic vs isotonic saline inhalation

Asian Pacific Journal of Allergy and Immunology

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 11-17

  Loh, Li Cher ^a   Eg, K P ^a   Puspanathan, P ^a   Tang, S P ^a   Yip, K S ^a   Vijayasingham, P ^b   Thayaparan, T ^b   Kumar, S ^b  

^a INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (Malaysia)

^b Seremban Hospital   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ISOTONIC SOLUTION; SODIUM CHLORIDE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CELL COUNT; CELL TYPE; CELL VIABILITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; COST CONTROL; FEMALE; FORCED EXPIRATORY VOLUME; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MACROPHAGE; MALE; NEBULIZATION; NEBULIZER; NEUTROPHIL; NORMAL HUMAN; REPRODUCIBILITY; RESPIRATORY TRACT INFLAMMATION; SPUTUM ANALYSIS; SPUTUM CYTODIAGNOSIS; SQUAMOUS CELL; ULTRASOUND;

ADMINISTRATION, INHALATION; ADULT; BRONCHIAL PROVOCATION TESTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; ISOTONIC SOLUTIONS; MALE; NEBULIZERS AND VAPORIZERS; SALINE SOLUTION, HYPERTONIC; SODIUM CHLORIDE; SPUTUM; TREATMENT OUTCOME; ULTRASONIC THERAPY;

EID: 4444293647     PISSN: 0125877X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Pin I, Gibson PG, Kolendowicz R, et al. Use of induced sputum cell counts to investigate airway inflammation in asthma. Thorax 1992; 47: 25-9.
2. Pizzichini E, Pizzichini MM, Efthimiadis A, et al. Indices of airway inflammation in induced sputum: reproducibility and validity of cell and fluid-phase measurements. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996; 154: 308-17.
3. Crapo RO, Jensen RL, Hargreave FE. Airway inflammation in COPD: physiological outcome measures and induced sputum. Eur Respir J Suppl 2003; 41: 19s-28s.
4. Pavord ID, Sterk PJ, Hargreave FE, et al. Clinical applications of assessment of airway inflammation using induced sputum. Eur Respir J 2002; 37: 40s-43s.
5. Fahy JV, Liu J, Wong H, Boushey HA. Analysis of cellular and biochemical constituents of induced sputum after allergen challenge: a method for studying allergic airway inflammation. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1994; 93: 1031-9.
6. Turner MO, Johnston PR, Pizzichini E, Pizzichini MM, Hussack PA, Hargreave FE. Anti-inflammatory effects of salmeterol compared with beclomethasone in eosinophilic mild exacerbations of asthma: a randomized, placebo controlled trial. Can Respir J 1998; 5: 261-8.
7. de la Fuente PT, Romagnoli M, Godard P, Bousquet J, Chanez P. Safety of inducing sputum in patients with asthma of varying severity. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1998; 157: 1127-30.
8. Hunter CJ, Ward R, Woltmann G, Wardlaw AJ, Pavord ID. The safety and success rate of sputum induction using a low output ultrasonic nebulizer. Respir Med 1999; 93: 345-8.
9. Dennis JH, Stenton SC, Beach JR, Avery AJ, Walters EH, Hendrick DJ. Jet and ultrasonic nebuliser output: use of a new method for direct measurement of aerosol output. Thorax 1990; 45: 728-32.
10. Smith D, Erskine D, Steele J, Hills D, Gazzard B. Comparison of nebuliser efficiency for aerosolizing pentamidine. J Pharm Pharmacol 1992; 44: 7-9.
11. Votion D, Ghafir Y, Munsters K, Duvivier DH, Art T, Lekeux P. Aerosol deposition in equine lungs following ultrasonic nebulisation versus jet aerosol delivery system. Equine Vet J 1997; 29: 388-93.
12. Khatri L, Taylor KM, Craig DQ, Palin K. An assessment of jet and ultrasonic nebulisers for the delivery of lactate dehydrogenase solutions. Int J Pharm 2001; 227: 121-31.
13. Fok TF, Lam K, Ng PC, et al. Randomised crossover trial of salbutamol aerosol delivered by metered dose inhaler, jet nebuliser, and ultrasonic nebuliser in chronic lung disease. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed 1998; 79: F100-4.
14. Thomas SH, O'Doherty MJ, Graham A, et al. Pulmonary deposition of nebulised amiloride in cystic fibrosis: comparison of two nebulisers. Thorax 1991; 46: 717-21.
15. Gagnadoux F, Diot P, Marchand S, et al. Pulmonary deposition of colistin aerosols in cystic fibrosis. Comparison of an ultrasonic nebulizer and a pneumatic nebulizer. Rev Mal Respir 1996; 13: 55-60.
16. Daviskas E, Anderson SD, Gonda I, et al. Inhalation of hypertonic saline aerosol enhances mucociliary clearance in asthmatic and healthy subjects. Eur Respir J 1996; 9: 725-32.
17. Siergiejko Z, Zietkowski Z, Rogalewska AM. The effect of sputum induction on spirometry parameters in patients with bronchial asthma. Pneumonol Alergol Pol 1999; 67: 318-26.
18. Sont JK, Booms P, Bel EH, Vandenbroucke JP, Sterk PJ. The severity of breathlessness during challenges with inhaled methacholine and hypertonic saline in atopic asthmatic subjects. The relationship with deep breath-induced bronchodilation. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995; 152: 38-44.
19. Wojnarowski C, Storm Van's Gravesande K, Riedler J, Eichler I, Gartner C, Frischer T. Comparison of bronchial challenge with ultrasonic nebulized distilled water and hypertonic saline in children with mild-to-moderate asthma. Eur Respir J 1996; 9: 1896-901.
20. Bacci E, Cianchetti S, Paggiaro PL, et al. Comparison between hypertonic and isotonic saline-induced sputum in the evaluation of airway inflammation in subjects with moderate asthma. Clin Exp Allergy 1996; 26: 1395-400.
21. Cataldo D, Foidart JM, Lau L, Bartsch P, Djukanovic R, Louis R. Induced sputum: comparison between isotonic and hypertonic saline solution inhalation in patients with asthma. Chest 2001; 120: 1815-21.
22. Joos GF, O'Connor B, Anderson SD, et al. Indirect airway challenges. Eur Respir J 2003; 21: 1050-68.
23. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin 1979, 2: 420-8.
24. Clarke S. Principles of inhaled therapy. In: Brewis RAL, Corrin B, Geddes DM, Gibson GJ, eds. Respiratory Medicine. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 1995; pp. 488-9.
25. Flament MP, Leterme P, Gayot A. Influence of the technological parameters of ultrasonic nebulisation on the nebulisation quality of alpha-1 protease inhibitor (alpha-1 PI). Int J Pharm 1999; 189: 197-204.