Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30217179›Full record

ArticleBMC pulmonary medicine2018

Evaluation of continuous constant current and continuous pulsed current in sweat induction for cystic fibrosis diagnosis.

Carla Cristina Souza Gomez, Fernando Augusto Lima Marson, Maria Fátima Servidoni, Antônio Fernando Ribeiro, Maria Ângela Gonçalves Oliveira Ribeiro, Veruska Acioli Lopes Gama, Eduardo Tavares Costa, José Dirceu Ribeiro, Francisco Ubaldo Vieira Junior

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pulmonary medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 84% 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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carla Cristina Souza GomezDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-887, Brazil. carlacg.gomez@gmail.com.
Fernando Augusto Lima MarsonDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-887, Brazil. fernandolimamarson@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4955-4234
Maria Fátima ServidoniDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-887, Brazil.
Antônio Fernando RibeiroDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-887, Brazil.
Maria Ângela Gonçalves Oliveira RibeiroDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-887, Brazil.
Veruska Acioli Lopes GamaCenter for Biomedical Engineering, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-970, Brazil.
Eduardo Tavares CostaCenter for Biomedical Engineering, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-970, Brazil.
José Dirceu RibeiroDepartment of Pediatrics, School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-887, Brazil.
Francisco Ubaldo Vieira JuniorCenter for Biomedical Engineering, University of Campinas, Cidade Universitária Zeferino Vaz, Barão Geraldo, Campinas, São Paulo, 13083-970, Brazil.
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRFederal Institute of São Paulo · BR

Funding

CNPq - Secretaria de Educação Profissional e Tecnológica/Ministério da Educação 94/2013Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2011/18845-1Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2015/12183-8Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2015/12858-5Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (BR) 2011/12939-4Fundo de Apoio à Pesquisa, ao Ensino e à Extensão da Universidade Estadual de Campinas 648/2015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe sweat test (ST) is the gold standard for the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis (CF). However, little is known about sweat induction using different types of currents and waves. In this context, our objective was to develop a device to induce sweat and compare the use of continuous constant current (CCC) and continuous pulsed current (CPC) in individuals with CF and healthy controls.

methodsA prospective cross-sectional study with experimental intervention. The variables of gender, ethnicity, age, and body mass index (BMI) were considered. The method of Gibson and Cooke was used, and the following markers were evaluated: sweat weight, electrical impedance, sufficient sweat amount, and CF diagnosis. Triangular (TPC) or sinusoidal (SPC) pulsed current was applied to the right arm, and CCC was applied to the left arm.

resultsThe study analyzed 260 individuals, 141/213 (54.2%) were female participants, 135/260 (51.9%) were Caucasians. The distribution of individuals by concentration of chloride at the ST was: (CF) 26/260 (10%); (borderlines) 109/260 (41.9%); (healthy) 97/260 (37.3%); (insufficient weight in sweat) 28/260 (10.8%). No association was observed between the sufficient sweat amount to perform the ST when we compared the currents. However, the SPC showed a higher amount of sweat weight. Using Bland and Altman plot considering the agreement between the sweat chloride values achieved from CPC [SPC and TPC] and CCC, there was no proportional bias and mean values are unrelated and only explain less than 8% of the variation. Moreover, TPC presented higher electrical impedance when compared with SPC and CCC. SPC presented lower electrical impedance and higher sweat weight than CCC. Male participants presented lower electrical impedance and higher sweat weight with CCC and TPC, and higher sweat weight with SPC.

conclusionsThe evaluated currents are safe and able to induce and produce sweat in sufficient quantities for the ST. SPC presented lower electrical impedance when compared with other currents. The use of SPC is recommended to induce sweat in patients with sweat problems. Finally, ethnicity, gender, age and BMI did not influence sweat induction at the ST, and no side effect was observed in our study.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedBiomarkersChildChild, PreschoolChloridesCross-Sectional StudiesCystic FibrosisElectric ImpedanceFemaleHumansInfantMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesBiomarkersChloridesSodiumContinuous constant currentContinuous pulsed currentSinusoidal pulsed currentSweat testTriangular pulsed current

Identifiers

PMID30217179
PMCPMC6137935
OpenAlexW2889928859

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.