1989PubMedRequires access

Nasal provocation with histamine: a comparison of the determination of the threshold of reactivity by three methods of rhinomanometry.

Frans Gordts, Peter A. R. Clement, M. P. Derde

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

Three methods of rhinomanometry were compared with each other with respect to their ability to determine the histamine threshold (histamine concentration for a 100% increase of the initial total nasal resistance): the active anterior rhinomanometry (P.A.R.). Nasal challenge and consecutive measurement by the three methods of rhinomanometry were conducted in a group of 11 volunteers. The three methods gave significantly different histamine concentration thresholds (p = 0.002). Unilateral histamine thresholds as available from A.A.R. and P.A.R. (at a flow of 250 cm3/sec) did not differ significantly (p = 0.299). For A.A.R. and A.P.R., histamine thresholds were assessed at five different pressure values as well as at five different flow values. The thresholds did not appear to be significantly different at any one of those pressure gradients (p = 0.690) or flow values (p = 0.357).

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Three methods of rhinomanometry were compared with each other with respect to their ability to determine the histamine threshold (histamine concentration for a 100% increase of the initial total nasal resistance): the active anterior rhinomanometry (P.A.R.). Nasal challenge and consecutive measurement by the three methods of rhinomanometry were conducted in a group of 11 volunteers. The three methods gave significantly different histamine concentration thresholds (p = 0.002). Unilateral histamine thresholds as available from A.A.R. and P.A.R. (at a flow of 250 cm3/sec) did not differ significantly (p = 0.299). For A.A.R. and A.P.R., histamine thresholds were assessed at five different pressure values as well as at five different flow values. The thresholds did not appear to be significantly different at any one of those pressure gradients (p = 0.690) or flow values (p = 0.357).

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Three methods of rhinomanometry were compared with each other with respect to their ability to determine the histamine threshold (histamine concentration for a 100% increase of the initial total nasal resistance): the active anterior rhinomanometry (P.A.R.). Nasal challenge and consecutive measurement by the three methods of rhinomanometry were conducted in a group of 11 volunteers. The three methods gave significantly different histamine concentration thresholds (p = 0.002). Unilateral histamine thresholds as available from A.A.R. and P.A.R. (at a flow of 250 cm3/sec) did not differ significantly (p = 0.299). For A.A.R. and A.P.R., histamine thresholds were assessed at five different pressure values as well as at five different flow values. The thresholds did not appear to be significantly different at any one of those pressure gradients (p = 0.690) or flow values (p = 0.357).

Key concepts: Rhinomanometry, Histamine, Provocation test, Medicine, Anesthesia, Nasal provocation test, Nose, Internal medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Nasal provocation with histamine: a comparison of the determination of the threshold of reactivity by three methods of rhinomanometry. — Research Paper | ScholarLens