Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30005648›Full record

Observational studyBMC pulmonary medicine2018

Cell distribution and cytokine levels in induced sputum from healthy subjects and patients with asthma after using different nebulizer techniques.

Sinem Koc-Günel, Ralf Schubert, Stefan Zielen, Martin Rosewich

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01543516 (Cell Distribution in Induced Sputum in Healthy Subjects and Patients With Asthma After Different Techniques for Sputum Induction), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
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.

NCT01543516 completednot on this map

Cell Distribution in Induced Sputum in Healthy Subjects and Patients With Asthma After Different Techniques for Sputum Induction

TypeobservationalSponsorJohann Wolfgang Goethe University HospitalRan2011 to 2012Enrolled40ConditionsBronchial Asthma With eNO-levels Greater Than 30 ppB
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sinem Koc-GünelDepartment for Children and Adolescents, Division for Allergology, Pneumology and Cystic Fibrosis, University Hospital Goethe University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. sinem.koc-guenel@kgu.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4499-9007
Ralf SchubertDepartment for Children and Adolescents, Division for Allergology, Pneumology and Cystic Fibrosis, University Hospital Goethe University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Stefan ZielenDepartment for Children and Adolescents, Division for Allergology, Pneumology and Cystic Fibrosis, University Hospital Goethe University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Martin RosewichDepartment for Children and Adolescents, Division for Allergology, Pneumology and Cystic Fibrosis, University Hospital Goethe University, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSputum induction is an important noninvasive method for analyzing bronchial inflammation in patients with asthma and other respiratory diseases. Most frequently, ultrasonic nebulizers are used for sputum induction, but breath-controlled nebulizers may target the small airways more efficiently. This treatment may produce a cell distribution similar to bronchoalveolar lavage (less neutrophils and more macrophages) and provide deeper insights into the underlying lung pathology. The goal of the study was to compare both types of nebulizer devices and their efficacy in inducing sputum to measure bronchial inflammation, i.e., cell composition and cytokines, in patients with mild allergic asthma and healthy controls.

methodsThe population of this study consisted of 20 healthy control subjects with a median age of 17 years, range: 8-25 years, and 20 patients with a median age of 12 years, range: 8-24 years, presenting with mild, controlled allergic asthma who were not administered an inhaled steroid treatment. We induced sputum in every individual using both devices on two separate days. The sputum weight, the cell composition and cytokine levels were analyzed using a cytometric bead assay (CBA) and by real-time quantitative PCR (qRT-PCR).

resultsWe did not observe significant differences in the weight, cell distribution or cytokine levels in the sputum samples induced by both devices. In addition, the Bland-Altman correlation revealed good concordance of the cell distribution. As expected, eosinophils and IL-5 levels were significantly elevated in patients with asthma.

conclusionsThe hypothesis that sputum induction with a breath-controlled "smart" nebulizer is more efficient and different from an ultrasonic nebulizer was not confirmed. The Bland-Altman correlations showed good concordance when comparing the two devices.

trial registrationNCT01543516 Retrospective registration date: March 5, 2012.

Indexed as

Nebulizers and VaporizersAdolescentAdultAsthmaCase-Control StudiesChildCross-Sectional StudiesCytokinesEosinophilsFemaleForced Expiratory VolumeHumansHypersensitivity, ImmediateLeukocyte CountMaleSputumCytokinesAllergic asthmaBronchial inflammationCell distributionCytokinesInduced sputumSmart nebulizerUltrasonic nebulizer

Identifiers

PMID30005648
PMCPMC6045886
OpenAlexW2883026233

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.