Original article
A comparison of histamine and methacholine bronchial challenges using the DeVilbiss 646 nebulizer and the Rosenthal-French dosimeter

https://doi.org/10.1016/0007-0971(87)90158-6Get rights and content

Abstract

We have compared bronchial challenge with both histamine and methacholine for the tidal breathing method and dosimeter method, using the DeVilbiss 646 nebulizer, in 18 patients with asthma. There was a significant difference between the PC20 FEV1 but not the PD20 FEV1 when either agonist was administered by the different techniques but not by the same method.

References (7)

  • H Chai et al.

    Standardization of bronchial inhalation challenge procedures

    J Allergy Clin Immunol

    (1975)
  • NM Eiser et al.

    Guidelines for standardization of bronchial challenges with (non-specific) bronchoconstricting agents

    Bull Eur Physiopath Resp

    (1983)
  • A Beaupre et al.

    Comparison of histamine bronchial challenges with the Wright nebuliser and the dosimeter

    Clin Allergy

    (1979)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (22)

  • Difference between dosimeter and tidal breathing methacholine challenge: Contributions of dose and deep inspiration bronchoprotection

    2005, Chest
    Citation Excerpt :

    In contrast, in subjects with more significant AHR (PC20 < 2 mg/mL), the difference between the two methods was less than one doubling concentration and was entirely due to dose since the deep inhalation did not appear to influence the tidal breathing method. Similar observations were made by Bennett and Davies,11 who observed that, in subjects who had PC20 < 2 mg/mL, the tidal breathing method produced a lower PC20 than the dosimeter. However, the differences disappeared when corrected for the dose delivered.

  • Methacholine challenge: Comparison of two methods

    2005, Chest
    Citation Excerpt :

    Likewise, the means of calibration of the dosimeter nebulizer system discussed above (DeVilbiss) was also not specified. Several other studies17,18,19,20 cannot be compared to ours because of methodologic differences or lack of documentation of nebulizer output. These results indicate that when the tests are done as outlined by the ATS, different cut points should be used for the different methods.

  • Methacholine Challenge Testing: Comparison of the Two American Thoracic Society-Recommended Methods

    2004, Chest
    Citation Excerpt :

    Since the emphasis of the guidelines was on a twofold increasing concentration with tidal breathing and fourfold steps with dosimeter, we chose to conduct the study in this manner. Ryan et al9 found no difference between the tidal breathing and dosimeter, whereas Bennett and Davies2 reported lower PC20 values with tidal breathing. One reason for the difference between their studies may have been related to the nebulizers employed.

  • A Radiographer's asthma

    1992, Respiratory Medicine
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text