scholarly journals Evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) in patients with suspected asthma: study protocol for a prospective diagnostic study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e045420
Author(s):  
Christina Kellerer ◽  
Alexander Hapfelmeier ◽  
Rudolf A Jörres ◽  
Konrad Schultz ◽  
Benjamin Brunn ◽  
...  

IntroductionThe measurement of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) is promising for diagnosing asthma and might substitute for bronchial provocation (BP) tests. To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of FeNO within a confirmatory study, the following hypotheses will be tested: (1) A FeNO cut-off >50 ppb (parts per billion) is suitable for diagnosing asthma (sensitivity 35%, specificity 95%); (2) If the clinical symptoms ‘allergic rhinitis’ and ‘wheezing’ are present, asthma can be diagnosed at FeNO >33 ppb with a positive predictive value (PPV) >70% and (3) A FeNO >33 ppb can predict responsiveness to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) with a PPV >70%.Methods and analysisA prospective diagnostic study will be conducted in three practices of pneumologists in Germany. 300 patients suspected of suffering from asthma will be included. As an index test, patients perform FeNO measurement with the device NIOX VERO. As reference a test, patients are examined with whole bodyplethysmography and BP, if necessary. After 3 months, patients with an asthma diagnosis will be examined again to verify the diagnosis and evaluate ICS responsiveness. Patients who did not receive an asthma diagnosis at the initial examination will be phoned after 3 months and asked about persistent respiratory symptoms to exclude false negative findings. As a primary target, sensitivity and specificity of FeNO >50 ppb will be determined. As a secondary target the PPV for asthma at FeNO >33 ppb, when the symptoms ‘allergic rhinitis’ and ‘wheezing’ are present, will be calculated. Regarding ICS responsiveness, the PPV of FeNO >33 ppb will be determined.Ethics and disseminationThe study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Technical University of Munich (Reference number 122/20 S). The major results will be published in peer-reviewed academic journals and disseminated through conferences.Trial registration numberDRKS00021125.

2018 ◽  
Vol 93 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhen Wang ◽  
Paolo T. Pianosi ◽  
Karina A. Keogh ◽  
Feras Zaiem ◽  
Mouaz Alsawas ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoon Hee Kim ◽  
Hyun Bin Park ◽  
Min Jung Kim ◽  
Hwan Soo Kim ◽  
Hee Seon Lee ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 130 (11) ◽  
pp. 1064-1071 ◽  
Author(s):  
V S Nesic ◽  
V Z Djordjevic ◽  
V Tomic-Spiric ◽  
Z R Dudvarski ◽  
I A Soldatovic ◽  
...  

AbstractObjective:This study aimed to compare two sampling methods for nasal nitric oxide in healthy individuals and allergic rhinitis patients, and to examine the within-subject reliability of nasal nitric oxide measurement.Methods:The study included 23 allergic rhinitis patients without concomitant asthma and 10 healthy individuals. For all participants, nitric oxide levels were measured non-invasively from the lungs through the mouth (i.e. the oral fractional exhaled nitric oxide) and the nose. Nasal nitric oxide was measured by two different methods: (1) nasal aspiration via one nostril during breath holding and (2) single-breath quiet exhalation against resistance through a tight facemask (i.e. the nasal fractional exhaled nitric oxide).Results:Compared with healthy participants, allergic rhinitis patients had significantly higher average oral and nasal nitric oxide levels. All methods of nitric oxide measurement had excellent reliability.Conclusion:Nasal nitric oxide measurement is a useful and reliable clinical tool for diagnosing allergic rhinitis in patients without asthma in an out-patient setting.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document