|
|
||||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Department of Medicine, Division of Respiratory Medicine, Royal University Hospital, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada.
Correspondence to: Donald W. Cockcroft, MD, FCCP, Division of Respiratory Medicine, Royal University Hospital, 103 Hospital Dr, Ellis Hall, Room 551, Saskatoon, SK S7N 0W8 Canada; e-mail: cockcroft{at}sask.usask.ca
Background: Methacholine-induced bronchoconstriction is associated with significant hypoxemia, which can be assessed noninvasively by transcutaneous oxygen tension and pulse oximetry.
Objectives: To assess the value of the monitoring of finger pulse oximetry during routine methacholine challenges in a clinical pulmonary function laboratory with regard to both safety and the possibility that a significant fall in oxygen saturation as measured by pulse oximetry (SpO2) might be a useful surrogate for determining the response to methacholine.
Methods: Two hundred consecutive patients undergoing
diagnostic methacholine challenges in the pulmonary function laboratory
of a tertiary-care, university-based referral hospital were studied.
Methacholine challenges were performed by the standardized 2-min tidal
breathing technique, and the
FEV1 was calculated from
the lowest postsaline solution inhalation to the lowest
postmethacholine inhalation value. SpO2 was
measured immediately prior to each spirogram, and the
SpO2 was measured from the lowest postsaline
solution inhalation value to the lowest postmethacholine inhalation
value. We examined the data for safety (ie, any
SpO2 value < 90). Based on previous reports,
we used a
SpO2 of
3 as significant and
looked at the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative
predictive values for
SpO2
3
vis-à-vis a fall in FEV1 of
15%.
Results: There were 119 nonresponders (
FEV1,
< 15%) and 81 responders. The baseline FEV1 percent
predicted was slightly but significantly lower in the responders
(responders [± SD], 91.6 ± 15%; nonresponders, 96.4 ± 14%;
p < 0.05).
SpO2 was 3.1 ± 1.6 in the
responders and 1.6 ± 1.8 in the nonresponders (p < 0.001). There
was a single recording in one patient of SpO2
< 90 (88). A
SpO2
3 had a sensitivity
of 68%, a specificity of 73%, a positive predictive value of 63%,
and negative predictive value of 77% for a fall in FEV1
15%.
Conclusions: Pulse oximetry is not routinely
useful for safety monitoring during methacholine challenge.
SpO2 is not helpful in predicting a positive
spirometric response to methacholine. However, the negative predictive
value is adequate to allow the
SpO2 to be
used as an adjunct in assessing a negative result of a methacholine
test in patients who have difficulty performing
spirometry.
Key Words: asthma methacholine test oxygen saturation
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |