Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

Exhaled breath condensate pH

R.M. Effros
European Respiratory Journal 2004 23: 961-962; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.04.00014704
R.M. Effros
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

To the Editor:

Vaughan et al. 1 are to be congratulated for the most extensive study of the pH of exhaled breath condensates (EBC) yet reported. However, there is reason to doubt that the pH of the condensate provides a reliable measure of the pH of fluid lining the airways. As noted in our recent study 2, the average concentration of NH4+ is 20 times greater than that of any other EBC cation in normal condensates, and NH4+ accounts for most of the ions and buffer in the condensate (as judged by total conductivity).

Several previous studies have shown that most of this NH4+ is derived from NH3 generated in the mouth, in part from the bacterial degradation of urea 2–4. In the study by Vaughan et al. 1, collection of condensates through endotracheal tubes did not seem to have an effect upon average pH. Since both intubation and tracheostomy significantly reduce NH4+ concentrations of the EBC 2, they should be associated with more acidic condensates. This paradox could only be explained if intubation also reduced concentrations of some atmospheric or oral acid (e.g. residual CO2 or acetic acid) in the EBC. It must be concluded that the pH of normal condensates reflects buffering by these volatile constituents from the mouth, rather than buffers in the airway fluid, and therefore EBC pH cannot provide reliable estimates of airway pH.

Although the normal condensate pH is set by oral and atmospheric buffers, Hunt and coworkers 5 observed “acidopnoea” in asthmatics, which they attributed to airway acidification. We have suggested that reductions in exchange of NH3 in the mouth and condenser are responsible in part for the reduction in EBC NH4+ seen in asthmatics 7, and consequently contribute to acidification. It is also possible that reflux of gastric fluid, which is extraordinarily common in asthmatics 8, is responsible for EBC acidification. Aerosolisation of tiny quantities of gastric acid (pH often 1–2) from the stomach or pharynx would be difficult to avoid or detect in these patients but could have a profound effect on EBC pH.

    • © ERS Journals Ltd

    References

    1. ↵
      Vaughan J, Ngamtrakulpanit L, Pajewski TN, et al. Exhaled breath condensate pH is a robust and reproducible assay of airway acidity. Eur Respir J 2003;22:889–894.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    2. ↵
      Effros RM, Biller J, Foss B, et al. A simple method for estimating respiratory solute dilution in exhaled breath condensates. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003;168:1500–1505.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    3. Norwood DM, Wainman T, Lioy PJ, Waldman JM. Breath ammonia depletion and its relevance to acidic aerosol exposure studies. Arch Environ Health 1992;47:309–313.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    4. ↵
      Vass G, Huszar E, Barat E, et al. Comparison of nasal and oral inhalation during exhaled breath condensate collection. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003;167:850–855.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    5. ↵
      Hunt J, Fang K, Malik R, et al. Endogenous airway acidification: implications for asthma pathophysiology. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:694–699.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    6. Hunt JF, Erwin E, Palmer L, et al. Expression and activity of pH-regulatory glutaminase in the human airway epithelium. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002;165:101–107.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    7. ↵
      Effros RM. Do low exhaled NH4+ concentrations in asthma reflect reduced pulmonary production?. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003;167:91–92.
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    8. ↵
      Harding SM. Recent clinical investigations examining the association of asthma and gastroesophageal reflux. Am J Med 2003;115:137–143.
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    View this article with LENS
    Vol 23 Issue 6 Table of Contents
    • Table of Contents
    • Index by author
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

    NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Exhaled breath condensate pH
    (Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Print
    Citation Tools
    Exhaled breath condensate pH
    R.M. Effros
    European Respiratory Journal Jun 2004, 23 (6) 961-962; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.04.00014704

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero

    Share
    Exhaled breath condensate pH
    R.M. Effros
    European Respiratory Journal Jun 2004, 23 (6) 961-962; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.04.00014704
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    Full Text (PDF)

    Jump To

    • Article
      • References
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    More in this TOC Section

    • Clinical outcomes of bronchiectasis in India
    • Reply: Clinical outcomes of bronchiectasis in India
    • Risk factors for disease progression in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis
    Show more Correspondence

    Related Articles

    Navigate

    • Home
    • Current issue
    • Archive

    About the ERJ

    • Journal information
    • Editorial board
    • Reviewers
    • Press
    • Permissions and reprints
    • Advertising

    The European Respiratory Society

    • Society home
    • myERS
    • Privacy policy
    • Accessibility

    ERS publications

    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS books online
    • ERS Bookshop

    Help

    • Feedback

    For authors

    • Instructions for authors
    • Publication ethics and malpractice
    • Submit a manuscript

    For readers

    • Alerts
    • Subjects
    • Podcasts
    • RSS

    Subscriptions

    • Accessing the ERS publications

    Contact us

    European Respiratory Society
    442 Glossop Road
    Sheffield S10 2PX
    United Kingdom
    Tel: +44 114 2672860
    Email: journals@ersnet.org

    ISSN

    Print ISSN:  0903-1936
    Online ISSN: 1399-3003

    Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society