Rhinomanometry – A Review

Abstract

After a short historical review, the advantages and disadvantages of the current rhinomanometric methods are discussed. In addition, the merits of spirometry or measurements of the air velocity are considered. The physics of nasal ventilation are described and the difficulty in nasal resistance measurement is studied. The different mathematical models representing nasal airflow are presented and the importance of the Broms’ mathematical model is stressed.

Assessment of Upper Respiratory Tract and Ocular Irritative Effects of Volatile Chemicals in Humans

“…This technique requires more training of the subject performing the breathing maneuver, and some individuals seemed unable to perform the test. For this reason, the active, anterior, uninasal rhinomanometric method is more practical, 231 and has been more widely employed in assessing acute and long-term exposure to various airborne irritants. [232][233][234] A recent development in the field of rhinomanometry, termed high resolution rhinomanometry (HRR), was developed by Vogt and Hoffricter in Germany in 1994.…”

Rhinomanometry: An Update

“…The posterior technique allows direct, while the anterior one only indirect calculation of the total nasal resistance. International standards include accommodation to room conditions, sitting position at rest, avoidance of medication interfering with nasal resistance, standardised decongestion of the nasal mucosa, and values reported for inspiration at recommended differential pressure points (75, 100, 150 Pa [34]). …”

Azelastine Reduces Histamine-lnduced Swelling of Nasal Mucosa

“…Additionally patients rated their complaints using a symptom score with 10 items as specified below. Twenty-eight patients showed a rhinomanometrically proven decrease in How and a rhinometrically substantiated reduction in volume under hista mine and allergen provocation according to the criteria of the Euro pean Rhinology Society [12]. Detailed information about the study was given and written informed consent was obtained from these patients who were then included in the double-blind study.…”

“…Then the patient breathes through his free nostril via a breathing mask through which the registration of the volume flow takes place. From several inspirations the computer calculates a representative breathing cycle using spline interpolation [13], According to interna tional standards [12] the nasal volume flow of inspiration at a trans nasal pressure of 150 Pa was used for statistical analysis. As a time period of 2 h elapsed between the initial measurements before medi cation and measurements after provocation a simple comparison of the relative changes in volume flow would have led to incorrect mea surements due to the physiological nasal cycles.…”