We have located links that may give you full text access.
Controlled Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Studies
Exhaled nitric oxide indicates poorly athlete's asthma.
Clinical Respiratory Journal 2013 October
INTRODUCTION: In athletes, exercise-induced respiratory symptoms are common and their assessment is time and resource consuming.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) as a predictor of bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) and of asthma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-seven elite athletes and a control group of 87 sedentary patients with symptoms suggesting asthma underwent measurements of FENO and of BHR by using methacholine provocation test (MCH) and eucapnic voluntary hyperpnoea (EVH) (athletes) or histamine provocation test (HIST) (controls).
RESULTS: In athletes, elevated FENO (>30 ppb) was not associated with lung function-confirmed asthma or with MCH positivity, but receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis showed some predictive value for EVH positivity [Area Under Curve (AUC) 0.652, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53 to 0.78, P = 0.020]. However, the sensitivity (55%) and the specificity (71%) were poor. In sedentary patients, FENO was significantly associated with both confirmed asthma and HIST positivity, ROC analysis showing FENO to be significantly predictive for HIST positivity (AUC 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.96, P = 0.001) and for asthma (AUC 0.74, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.85, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The results suggest that in contrast to sedentary patients, FENO seems to be a poor predictor of BHR and of clinical asthma in elite athletes. We find it unlikely that FENO could be a useful screening tool in athletes with exercise-induced respiratory symptoms.
OBJECTIVE: The objective was to evaluate fractional concentration of exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) as a predictor of bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) and of asthma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighty-seven elite athletes and a control group of 87 sedentary patients with symptoms suggesting asthma underwent measurements of FENO and of BHR by using methacholine provocation test (MCH) and eucapnic voluntary hyperpnoea (EVH) (athletes) or histamine provocation test (HIST) (controls).
RESULTS: In athletes, elevated FENO (>30 ppb) was not associated with lung function-confirmed asthma or with MCH positivity, but receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis showed some predictive value for EVH positivity [Area Under Curve (AUC) 0.652, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.53 to 0.78, P = 0.020]. However, the sensitivity (55%) and the specificity (71%) were poor. In sedentary patients, FENO was significantly associated with both confirmed asthma and HIST positivity, ROC analysis showing FENO to be significantly predictive for HIST positivity (AUC 0.83, 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.96, P = 0.001) and for asthma (AUC 0.74, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.85, P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The results suggest that in contrast to sedentary patients, FENO seems to be a poor predictor of BHR and of clinical asthma in elite athletes. We find it unlikely that FENO could be a useful screening tool in athletes with exercise-induced respiratory symptoms.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app