Nasal flow, volumes, and minimal cross sectional areas in asthmatics

Thorstensen, Wenche Moe; Sue‐Chu, Malcolm; Bugten, Vegard; Steinsvåg, Sverre K.

doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2013.07.021

Cited by 21 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The MCA in our sample was located between 0-3 cm from the nasal orifi ce in almost all of our subjects (95% of asthmatics and 98% of controls) (21) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The determining factors of peak nasal inspiratory flow and perception of nasal airflow in asthmatics

Thorstensen

Sue‐Chu

Bugten

et al. 2014

Rhin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The effect of pulmonary pathology on peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) remains largely unknown. We investigated an association between a diagnosis of asthma and of lung function on PNIF when adjusted for possible confounders. Further, we investigated the perception of nasal obstruction in asthmatics compared to healthy controls when adjusted for PNIF.Methodology: Eighty-seven asthmatics and 92 non-asthmatic controls underwent PNIF (categorized into groups of high, medium and low), acoustic rhinometry (AR) and spirometry, and we assessed symptoms of nasal obstruction on visual analogue scales (VAS) in three categories.Results: PNIF was significantly associated with asthma and forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) (% predicted).Other factors associated with PNIF were the degree of nasal obstruction measured both subjectively on a VAS and objectively with AR, age and disease status. Asthma patients were 19 times more likely to be in a higher VAS category compared to non-asthmatic controls independent of PNIF group. Conclusion:Special care has to be taken when interpreting PNIF values in patients with asthma or reduced FEV1 (% predicted).The sensation of nasal obstruction in asthmatics is different from controls despite being in the same PNIF group.

show abstract

“…The MCA in our sample was located between 0-3 cm from the nasal orifi ce in almost all of our subjects (95% of asthmatics and 98% of controls) (21) .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…The sample, nasal recordings, questionnaires, and additional recordings were extracted from a database described previously (21) .…”

Section: Study Populationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The determining factors of peak nasal inspiratory flow and perception of nasal airflow in asthmatics

Thorstensen

Sue‐Chu

Bugten

et al. 2014

Rhin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rhinometer was programmed for NCV 0-3 and NCV 3-5.2 , defined Similarly, in our study NC volume did not differ significantly between male and female up to 14 years of age. We thought that numerical differences among our study and others may be derived from the subjects' race, gender, age and methods that were used in researches [35,40]. Only 1 study has investigated the volume of the NC, MNC and INC with CT images using stereological method in healthy people.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…So they may change parameters of sampling (the spacing of points in the grid or the number of slices available in any MR imaging study) to provide a reasonable CE value [17,32]. In literature, Thorstensen et al [40] investigated nasal airway patency in asthmatics compared to nonasthmatic controls. Nasal cavity volume (NCV) was measured using acoustic rhinometry.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related changes of nasal cavity and conchae volumes and volume fractions in children: a stereological study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, at posttreatment visit 2, the decrease in ΔMCA 30 min-baseline in the placebo group (-0.16) was significantly less than that in the AzeFlu group (-0.04, p = 0.02). In previous studies, an absolute difference of 0.05 cm -2 or a percent change between 16 and 29% in MCA was shown to be clinically significant [32,33]. In our study, the values of percent change in ΔMCA 30 min-baseline for the AzeFlu-treated and placebo-treated subjects were 2.8% (±8) and -28.6% (±11), respectively ( p = 0.037) (experimental data available in online suppl.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Pilot Study Investigating Clinical Responses and Biological Pathways of Azelastine/Fluticasone in Nonallergic Vasomotor Rhinitis before and after Cold Dry Air Provocation

Singh¹,

Bernstein²,

Lorentz³

et al. 2017

Int Arch Allergy Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Nonallergic vasomotor rhinitis (NAVMR) has been considered a diagnosis by exclusion due to unknown mechanisms or lack of diagnostic biomarkers. Methods: To determine clinical responses and biological pathways in NAVMR subjects challenged to cold dry air (CDA) in an environmental exposure chamber (EEC) pre- and posttreatment with azelastine/fluticasone (AzeFlu), 30 NAVMR subjects, prescreened for CDA-induced symptoms (approx. 14°C, <15% relative humidity, ×1 h) were randomized to treatment with AzeFlu (n = 20) or placebo (n = 10) for 2 weeks. Total nasal symptoms scores, minimum cross-sectional area, cough, and conjunctival redness were recorded at visit 1 (pretreatment) and visit 2 (posttreatment) before, during, and after CDA challenge. At both visits, nasal lavage fluid (NLF) and nasal scrapings (NS) were collected pre- and post-CDA challenge. Substance P, neurokinin-A, and calcitonin gene-related peptide concentrations in NLF were analyzed pre- and postchallenge at each visit. Their relationship with CDA-induced symptoms was determined by statistical analysis. MicroRNA sequencing from NS determined differentially expressed miRNA between the treatment groups post-CDA challenge at each visit. Results: The minimum cross-sectional area (p < 0.05), cough count (p < 0.05), and substance P (p < 0.01) improved posttreatment with AzeFlu versus placebo. Gene targets for differentially expressed miRNAs at visit 1 were enriched for biological pathways regulating epithelial ciliogenesis and cell integrity that were modified in the AzeFlu-treated group versus placebo posttreatment. Conclusions: This study demonstrated the feasibility of an EEC model to investigate CDA-induced clinical responses and pathobiology in NAVMR subjects pre- and posttreatment with AzeFlu. NAVMR disease mechanisms for other nonallergic triggers can be investigated similarly.

show abstract

Nasal flow, volumes, and minimal cross sectional areas in asthmatics

Abstract: The present study demonstrates a significantly smaller nasal airway when assessed by minimum cross sectional area and nasal cavity volume in asthmatics than controls, and these findings apply to asthmatics and controls irrespective of allergy status.

Cited by 21 publications

References 21 publications

The determining factors of peak nasal inspiratory flow and perception of nasal airflow in asthmatics

The determining factors of peak nasal inspiratory flow and perception of nasal airflow in asthmatics

Age-related changes of nasal cavity and conchae volumes and volume fractions in children: a stereological study

A Pilot Study Investigating Clinical Responses and Biological Pathways of Azelastine/Fluticasone in Nonallergic Vasomotor Rhinitis before and after Cold Dry Air Provocation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About