A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The characteristics of different diagnostic tests in adult mild asthmatic patients: comparison with patients with asthma-like symptoms by gastro-oesophageal reflux. | LitMetric

Background: Diagnosing asthma cannot be always easy. It is important to consider the validity of the diagnostic tests, and/or how much more commonly they are positive in patients with asthma compared to healthy subjects and, particularly, to patients with asthma-like symptoms.

Objective: To evaluate the validity of diagnostic tests for asthma, in terms of sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, in patients with bronchial asthma compared to patients affected by gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD) with asthma-like symptoms, and healthy control subjects without asthma and gastro-oesophageal reflux (GER).

Design: Single-center, cross-sectional, observational study.

Patients: We studied 60 patients with mild asthma, 30 patients with GERD and asthma-like symptoms and 25 healthy control subjects.

Measurements: We measured provocative concentration of methacholine causing a 20% fall in the forced expiratory volume in 1s (MCh PC(20)/FEV(1)), the amplitude percent mean of peak expiratory flow (A%M of PEF), derived from twice-daily readings for >2 weeks, the FEV(1)/forced vital capacity (FEV(1)/FVC) ratio, the eosinophil count in blood and in induced sputum and the serum eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) levels.

Results: FEV(1)/FVC ratio, A%M of PEF, blood eosinophils counts and serum ECP levels were less sensitive and specific when the reference population was composed of patients with asthma-like symptoms by GER. While, MCh PC(20)/FEV(1) and induced sputum eosinophils count were the most sensitive (both 90%) and specific (89% and 92%, respectively) tests.

Conclusion: Our findings demonstrate that MCh PC(20)/FEV(1) and the induced sputum eosinophil count are the most useful objective tests in patients with mild asthma. All patients with asthma presented both an MCh PC(20)/FEV(1) <1500 microg and eosinophils count in the induced sputum >1%.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2007.01.014DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

asthma-like symptoms
16
mch pc20/fev1
16
diagnostic tests
12
patients asthma-like
12
gastro-oesophageal reflux
12
induced sputum
12
patients
11
asthma
8
validity diagnostic
8
patients asthma
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!