What is the Best Way to Diagnose Possible Asthma Patients with Negative Bronchodilator Reversibility Tests?
Buket Başa Akdoğan,Ilkay Koca Kalkan,Gözde Köycü Buhari,Özlem Özdedeoğlu,Hale Ateş,Kurtuluş Aksu,Ferda Öner Erkekol
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/jaa.s437756
2024-02-22
Journal of Asthma and Allergy
Abstract:Buket Ba&scedila Akdo&gbrevean, Ilkay Koca Kalkan, Gözde Köycü Buhari, Özlem Özdedeo&gbrevelu, Hale Ate&scedil, Kurtulu&scedil Aksu, Ferda Öner Erkekol Department of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey Correspondence: Buket Ba&scedila Akdo&gbrevean, Department of Chest Diseases, Division of Immunology and Allergy, University of Health Sciences Ataturk Chest Diseases and Chest Surgery Education and Research Hospital, Incirlist, No: 57 Floor:3, 34147 Bakirkoy/Istanbul, Ankara, Turkey, Tel +90 5053518861 ; +90 850 4339393, Email Objective: The best method and strategy for the diagnosis of asthma remains unclear, especially in patients with negative bronchodilator reversibility test (BDRT). In our study, we aimed to investigate the diagnostic yield of peak expiratory flow (PEF) variability for this patient group. Methods: A total of 50 patients with suspected asthma, all with negative BDR test, were included in the study. Demographic information and symptoms were recorded and PEF variability was monitored for 2 weeks. Metacolinbronchial provocation test (mBPT) was performed. Asthma was diagnosed when PEF variability ≥ 20% and/or positive mBPT was observed. Results: 30 of 50 patients were diagnosed with asthma. After 1 month, 17 patients were evaluated for treatment outcomes. The sensitivity and specificity of PEF variability for different cut-off values (≥ 20%, > 15% and > 10%) were 61.5– 83.3, 88.5– 62.5 and 100– 16.7, respectively. One of the most important findings of our study was the absence of variable airflow limitation or airway hyper reactivity in 39% patients with a previous diagnosis of asthma. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that a low baseline FEF 25-75 value was an independent predictive factor for the diagnosis of asthma (p= 0.05). Conclusion: The most efficient diagnostic test for asthma is still unclear due to many factors. Our study is one of the few studies on this subject. Although current diagnostic recommendations generally recommend a PEF variability of 10% for the diagnosis of asthma, this threshold may not be appropriate for the BDR-negative patient group. Our results suggest using a threshold value of < 15% for PEF variability when excluding asthma and ≥ 20% when confirming the diagnosis of asthma in patients with clinically suspected but unproven reversibility. Furthermore, FEF 25-75 is considered to be an important diagnostic parameter that should be included in diagnostic recommendations for asthma. Keywords: diagnosis of asthma, reversibility, peak expiratory flow (PEF) variability, bronchial challenge test, forced expiratory flow (25-75%) Asthma is the most common chronic disease worldwide. More than 339 million people live with asthma. 1 It is estimated that 100 million people will be diagnosed with asthma by 2025. 2 It is a heterogeneous disease, usually characterised by chronic airway inflammation. It is characterised by variable airflow obstruction as well as adaptive respiratory symptoms that vary in time and intensity. The need to address the variable airflow limitation that characterises asthma before initiating treatment is emphasised in updated asthma management guidelines. 3,4 Population-based studies in children, adults and the elderly show that 20–70% of people with asthma go undiagnosed and ultimately untreated. These studies also show that 30–35% of children are frequently misdiagnosed with asthma and that asthma is overdiagnosed in the general population 5 There are many studies investigating the use of testing methods such as spirometric reversibility, PEF monitoring and mBPT for the correct diagnosis of asthma. 6,7 However, the most appropriate test and strategy for diagnosis remains unclear, especially in patients in whom early reversibility cannot be demonstrated by spirometry. 6–8 In our study, we aimed to draw attention to personalised PEF devices, which we believe may be helpful in the diagnosis and follow-up of asthma even during unprecedented events such as pandemic restrictions. 9 To increase the diagnostic efficiency and usability of PEF variability, we aimed to review the cut-off value of 10% recommended by GINA 3 and the cut-off value of 20% 10 recommended by other guidelines and to determine the most appropriate PEF variability cut-off value. The people who applied to our outpatient clinic with complaints consistent with asthma between June 2016 and 2017 were evaluated. From this patient population, patients who had no problems in physical examination, whose early -Abstract Truncated-
immunology,allergy,respiratory system