Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19254389›Full record

ArticleRespiratory research2009

Diagnosing asthma in general practice with portable exhaled nitric oxide measurement--results of a prospective diagnostic study: FENO < or = 16 ppb better than FENO < or =12 ppb to rule out mild and moderate to severe asthma [added].

Antonius Schneider, Lisa Tilemann, Tjard Schermer, Lena Gindner, Gunter Laux, Joachim Szecsenyi, Franz Joachim Meyer

Erratum issuedAbstract readEvaluation StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Respiratory research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Serial monitoring of exhaled nitric oxide in lung transplant recipients.The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation · 2015
    Article
  12. Diagnostic accuracy of exhaled nitric oxide in asthma: a meta-analysis of 4,691 participants.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Characterizing asthma from a drop of blood using neutrophil chemotaxis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  15. Review
  16. The adult asthmatic.Clinical reviews in allergy & immunology · 2012
    Review
  17. Does my patient have asthma?The Permanente journal · 2011
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Antonius SchneiderDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. antonius.schneider@med.uni-heidelberg.de
Lisa Tilemann
Tjard Schermer
Lena Gindner
Gunter Laux
Joachim Szecsenyi
Franz Joachim Meyer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo evaluate the sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) for the diagnosis of asthma in general practice.

methodsProspective diagnostic study with 160 patients attending 10 general practices for the first time with complaints suspicious of obstructive airway disease (OAD). Patients were referred to a lung function laboratory for diagnostic investigation. The index test was FENO measured with a portable FENO analyser based on electrochemical sensor. The reference standard was the Tiffeneau ratio (FEV1/VC) as received by spirometric manoeuvre and/or results of bronchial provocation. Bronchial provocation with methacholine was performed to determine bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR) in the event of inconclusive spirometric results.

results88 (55%) were female; their average age was 43.9 years. 75 (46.9%) patients had asthma, 25 (15.6%) had COPD, 8 (5.0%) had an overlap of COPD and asthma, and 52 (32.5%) had no OAD. At a cut-off level of 46 parts per billion (ppb) (n = 30; 18.8%), sensitivity was 32% (95%CI 23-43%), specificity 93% (95%CI 85-97%), positive predictive value (PPV) 80% (95%CI 63-91%), negative predictive value (NPV) 61% (95%CI 52-69%) when compared with a 20% fall in FEV1 from the baseline value (PC20) after inhaling methacholine concentration <or= 16 mg/ml. At 76 ppb (n = 11; 6.9%) specificity was 100% (95%CI 96-100%) and PPV was 100% (95%CI 72-100). At a cut-off level of 16 ppb (n = 68; 42.5%), sensitivity was 79% (95%CI 67-88), specificity 55% (95%CI 45-64), PPV 50% (95%CI 40-60), NPV 82% (95%CI 72-90 [corrected] when compared with a 20% fall of FEV1 after inhaling methacholine concentration <or= 4 mg/ml. Two [corrected] patients with unsuspicious spirometric results have to be tested with FENO to save one bronchial provocation test.

conclusionAsthma could be ruled in with FENO > 46 ppb. Mild and moderate to severe asthma could be ruled out with FENO <or= 16 ppb [corrected]. FENO measurement with an electrochemical sensor might be reasonable with respect to the time consuming procedure of bronchial provocation, which carries also some risk of severe bronchospasm. Further research is necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of this dual diagnostic strategy. The number needed to diagnose might be improved when the diagnostic precision could be enhanced by future technical developments.

Indexed as

ExhalationFamily PracticeAdultAgedAsthmaBreath TestsBronchial HyperreactivityBronchial Provocation TestsBronchoconstrictor AgentsElectrochemical TechniquesEquipment DesignFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeGermanyHumansLungBronchoconstrictor AgentsMethacholine ChlorideNitric Oxide

Identifiers

PMID19254389
PMCPMC2660901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.