Chest ACCP Education Calendar
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cloutier, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Malo, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cloutier, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Malo, J. L.

Chest, Vol 102, 402-407, Copyright © 1992 by American College of Chest Physicians

ARTICLES

Validation of an exposure system to particles for the diagnosis of occupational asthma

Y Cloutier, F Lagier, A Cartier and JL Malo
Institut de recherche en sante et securite du travail, Hopital du Sacre- Coeur, Montreal, Canada.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We previously described a closed-circuit system for exposure to particles in humans. This system has three components: a particle generator, an exposure chamber connected to an orofacial mask, and monitors. We describe results of challenges in 56 subjects who underwent challenges with the apparatus using occupational sensitizers in particles. SUBJECTS: Fifty-six consecutive subjects referred for the investigation of occupational asthma to occupational sensitizers in particles were included. The agents were the following: flour and grains (n = 19), cedar (n = 10), psyllium (n = 9), guar gum (n = 9), drugs (n = 3), persulfate (n = 2), and miscellaneous (n = 4). INTERVENTION: The duration of exposure was progressive and varied from one breath to a maximum of 180 min depending on the reaction. When no significant fall in FEV1 occurred after exposure with the aerosolization device, the standard approach of tipping particles from one tray to another was used. RESULTS: Twenty-nine subjects (52 percent) had a significant (greater than or equal to 20 percent) fall in FEV1 after exposure. This includes 18 subjects with isolated immediate reactions, four with dual asthmatic reactions, and two with atypical reactions. In 20/24 instances (83 percent), the percentage of fall in FEV1 did not exceed 30 percent, thus showing that dose-response curves can generally be obtained in a safe way. In all instances except one (26/27 cases), subsequent exposures using the traditional method did not result in significant falls in FEV1. CONCLUSION: This new procedure results in safe tests in terms of the percentage of changes in FEV1 during the immediate reactions and very rare false-negative challenges.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
J-L. Malo, A. Cartier, C. Lemiere, A. Desjardins, M. Labrecque, J. L'Archeveque, G. Perrault, J. Lesage, and Y. Cloutier
Exaggerated bronchoconstriction due to inhalation challenges with occupational agents
Eur. Respir. J., February 1, 2004; 23(2): 300 - 303.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
C. LEMIÈRE, A. CARTIER, J.-L. MALO, and S. B. LEHRER
Persistent Specific Bronchial Reactivity to Occupational Agents in Workers with Normal Nonspecific Bronchial Reactivity
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., September 1, 2000; 162(3): 976 - 980.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1992 by the American College of Chest Physicians.