This Article Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Article Archive Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carlsten, C. Articles by Hallstrand, T. S. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Carlsten, C. Articles by Hallstrand, T. S.

Safety of Sputum Induction With Hypertonic Saline Solution in Exercise-Induced Bronchoconstriction^*

^* From the Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle WA.

Correspondence to: Teal S. Hallstrand, MD, MPH, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Box 356522, Seattle, WA 98195; e-mail: tealh{at}u.washington.edu

Abstract

Background: The safety of sputum induction (SI) is well described in stable asthma, but the safety of SI in exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) has not been established.

Objectives: Our goals were to examine the relationship between the severity of EIB and bronchoconstriction during SI, and to determine if SI conducted after exercise challenge increases the risk of excess bronchoconstriction during SI.

Methods: SI was conducted in 32 patients with mild-to-moderate asthma (baseline FEV₁, 86 ± 9% of predicted [mean ± SD]) with EIB (15 to 63% reduction in FEV₁ following exercise challenge) following pretreatment with albuterol using 3% saline solution and repeated on a separate day 30-min after exercise challenge.

Results: There was a reduction in peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) during SI without exercise (mean maximum reduction vs baseline, 4.0% at 10 min; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0 to 7.1; p = 0.02) and during SI 30 min following exercise (mean maximum reduction vs baseline, 5.2% at 8 min; 95% CI, 1.0 to 7.5; p 0.01); however, there was no difference between the PEFR reductions during SI without or following exercise challenge. The best predictor of reduction in PEFR during SI was the preprocedure FEV₁, while the severity of EIB was not associated with bronchoconstriction during SI.

Conclusions: We conclude that SI can be performed safely following exercise challenge in asthmatics with EIB, and that the severity of EIB prior to SI is not a major determinant of bronchoconstriction during SI.

Key Words: asthma • bronchial hyperresponsiveness • exercise • exercise-induced bronchoconstriction • safety • sputum induction