PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Rhinomanometry”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1980

Some statistical data about anterior rhinomanometry.A comparative study between passive anterior rhinomanometry and active anterior rhinomanometry.

The authors studied the value of the passive anterior rhinomanometry. In a first group of 28 patients it was possible to determine by a confidence interval test if the type of the airstream was mainly laminar or turbulent . In a second group of 15 test subjects the type of airstream was graphically determined. At the same time, the values of nose resistance obtained with the P.A.R. were compared to the values obtained with active anterior rhinomanometry.

Airway Resistance↗
PubMed1983

[Comparison of active foreign flow rhinomanometry (oscillation method) and active personal flow rhinomanometry in 17 patients before and after correction of the nasal septum].

The nasal resistance of 17 patients with nasal septum deviation was measured before and after septum correction using two active rhinomanometric methods; the one with external flow (oscillation method), the other with spontaneous flow. Both methods correlated closely (p less than 0.01). The oscillation method proved to be as reliable and sensitive as the spontaneous flow method and less strenuous for the patient. Conventional rhinomanometric methods have failed especially in children because of their great demands on the patient's compliance; thus the oscillation method serves to increase the clinical application of rhinomanometry.

Airway Resistance↗
PubMed1978

[The clinical value of rhinomanometry. An analysis of the discrepancy between anamnesis, clinical state and rhinomanometry (author's transl)].

Anamnesis, clinical state according to inspection and Rhinomanometry result of 117 patients have been compared by means of a stardarized measuring unit. RM turns out to be indispensable for an exact functional analysis. Misjudgement of air conduction of the nose considering only anamnesis or clinical inspection is remarquable. The most frequent causes for misjudgement are listed. To estimate air conduction of the nose inspectionally a model based on physiological principles is indicated. A future uniform assessment of anamnesis clinical state and RM is indispensable to obtain finally comparable results.

Germany, West↗
PubMed1985

The applicability of rhinomanometry in nonatopic children: comparison of three techniques.

Three techniques for rhinomanometry were evaluated in 10 nonatopic children. Each child performed anterior, posterior, and forced oscillation rhinomanometry during 2 to 5 hr. Nasal airflow and transnasal driving pressure were measured continuously over several breaths. From the nasal airflow-pressure tracings, nasal airway resistance (Rn) was determined at a linear and a turbulent airflow. Individual average Rn values at linear airflow ranged from 1.0 to 5.4 cm H2O sec/L and at turbulent airflow from 1.5 to 7.6 cm H2O sec/L. There was no significant difference between the means on the log, scale of the individual average Rn measurements obtained by the conventional rhinomanometric techniques. Posterior and forced oscillation rhinomanometry exhibited a higher intrasubject variation in Rn than anterior rhinomanometry. In assessing performance, anterior rhinomanometry was the easiest method for the children to do. Two children despite multiple training sessions were unable to perform posterior or forced oscillation rhinomanometry. These findings indicate that anterior rhinomanometry is the easiest method for use in children.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

[Determination of nasal resistance in healthy subjects using 2 technics of rhinomanometry].

Transnasal pressure-flow relationship was studied by active rhinomanometry. Nasal resistance was determined by a microprocessor assisted technique during quiet inspiration in 106 adults (49 females and 57 males) and in 52 children (21 girls and 31 boys) in various circumstances. The study was performed 1) to calculate the airflow nasal resistance (R) in different subjects, 2) to determine the laminar (K1) and turbulent (K2) coefficients of flow in the upper airways according to Rohrer's equation: R = K1 + K2 V, and 3) to compare the results of anterior and posterior rhinomanometry. The results of the experiments show that 1) nasal resistance was constant during the nasal cycle and from one week to another in the same subjects; 2) nasal resistance were higher in females than in males, and higher in children than in adults depending on nose development; and 3) the nasal resistance measured by posterior rhinomanometry (RP) was approximately twice as by anterior rhinomanometry (RA) and the correlation was highly significant. The regression line was RA = 0.82 RP - 0.06 in kPa . 1(-1) . s (r = 0.998). Anterior rhinomanometry was easier to perform than posterior rhinomanometry and more useful for performing challenges of the nasal mucosa.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Reliable and reproducible anterior active rhinomanometry for the assessment of unilateral nasal resistance.

Unilateral nasal resistance is now thought to be more important than total resistance in promoting obstructive symptoms. We assessed the reproducibility of anterior active rhinomanometry in measuring unilateral nasal resistance. Ten baseline readings of unilateral nasal resistance were made over a 30-min period in seven healthy subjects (14 nostrils) using anterior active rhinomanometry performed according to the International Committee for the Standardization of Rhinomanometry (ICSR) guidelines. Baseline readings revealed that measurements using anterior active rhinomanometry had an unacceptably high coefficient of variation (19%-60%). With a more time-consuming revised protocol involving multiple recordings and the identification and exclusion of erroneous data, coefficients of variation of 7%-15% were obtained. We conclude that single anterior active rhinomanometry readings are potentially prone to large errors and each researcher using such equipment must satisfy his/herself that their methodology has an acceptable coefficient of variation in their hands. The ICSR guidelines are not always sufficient to allow reproducible measurement and specially designed protocols may be necessary to produce reliable results.

Humans↗
PubMed1991

[Active posterior rhinomanometry by means of a fine nasal catheter for obtaining postnasal pressure].

Recent years, active anterior rhinomanometry using a anesthetic face mask is probably more commonly employed than active posterior rhinomanometry because of occasional failure in obtaining the oropharyngeal pressure in the latter method. Thus, in attempt to overcome the disadvantage in active posterior rhinomanometry, we employed a fine nasal catheter (# 8F infant feeding nasal catheter) through the nasal cavity instead of a peroral mouth piece. Nasal resistances in a normal adult were measured by mask active posterior rhinomanometry with a mouth piece or a nasal catheter for obtaining postnasal pressure using Rhinorheograph MPR -2100 (manufactured by Nihon-Kohden Co., Ltd.). In adult, no significant differences of unilateral and bilateral nasal resistances between with the mouth piece and with the nasal catheter were found either on inspiration or expiration. It could be concluded in this fundamental study that active posterior rhinomanometry with the fine nasal catheter is useful and has no procedure problems.

Airway Resistance↗
PubMed1988

[Nasal provocation using histamine. A comparison of threshold determination using 3 methods of rhinomanometry].

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 (AAR), the active posterior rhinomanometry (APR) and the passive anterior rhinomanometry (PAR). 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 AAR and PAR (at a flow of 250 cm3/sec) did not differ significantly (p = 0.299). For AAR and APR, histamine thresholds were assessed at 5 different pressure values as well as at 5 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).

Adult↗
PubMed1987

The adrenaline contraction test with rhinomanometry.

The relationship between the sensation of nasal obstruction as a subjective symptom and nasal resistance was examined, and the adrenaline contraction test combined with rhinomanometry was evaluated. The nasal resistance was determined by the oscillation method using a rhinomanometry. As the sensation of nasal obstruction advanced, the nasal resistance tended to be increased. The group with a (-) sensation of nasal obstruction included patients with a high nasal resistance who corrected their first statement to a (+) sensation as a result of the adrenaline contraction test. The test indicated the sensation of nasal obstruction more accurately. In the 26 patients who underwent septoplasty and conchotomy, the rate of change in BNR by the adrenaline contraction test was 30-40%. The eight patients whose preoperative rate was less than 20% all showed a rate of more than 40% in unilateral rhinomanometry. Indications of reconstructive surgery for nasal obstruction may be present if the rate of change in BNR is 30-40% or the rate of change in unilateral rhinomanometry is more than 40%. Since the test predicted the postoperative nasal resistance, it can also be used in evaluating the results of surgical therapy.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Acoustic rhinometry, rhinomanometry and the amount of nasal secretion in the clinical monitoring of the nasal provocation test.

BACKGROUND: The reliable interpretation of the nasal provocation test in allergy diagnosis requires objective and measurable monitoring parameters for clinical practice. The clinical usefulness of the nasal provocation test has been limited by scanty knowledge of the specificity and sensitivity of the test and a lack of reference values. OBJECTIVE: To test and compare three objective monitoring parameters of a nasal provocation test in occupational allergic rhinitis. To evaluate the magnitude of the nasonasal effects in a unilateral allergen challenge. METHODS: The monitoring parameters of the nasal reaction were derived from the minimum cross-sectional area on acoustic rhinometry, the nasal resistance on active anterior rhinomanometry and the amount of nasal secretion measured at 15 min intervals for 60 min. Twenty-three bovine-allergic dairy and beef cattle farmers and 19 exposed, non-allergic control subjects were challenged first with a control solution and then with the cow allergen. RESULTS: All the three monitoring parameters showed high specificity and sensitivity in finding allergic and non-allergic subjects. The secretion parameter was found to be slightly superior to the acoustic rhinometry and rhinomanometry parameters. The side difference in the nasal response between the allergen-challenged and the contralateral diluent-challenged cavity was significant for all the parameters among the allergic subjects. The contralateral secretion amount was 1/3 of the ipsilateral secretion, indicating the magnitude of the contralateral nasonasal reflex. A nasonasal reflex was also noted in the nasal patency monitoring. The coefficient of variation was significantly lower for the acoustic rhinometry than for the rhinomanometry (P=0.0001). The optimal threshold values for a positive test were a secretion amount of 100 mg, a 15% decrease in the minimum cross-sectional area and a 50% increase in the resistance for the observation period of 30 min and correspondingly 210 mg, 30% and 100% for 60 min. CONCLUSION: The low-pressure aspiration of the nasal secretion from the anterior part of the nasal cavity was found to be a reliable and practical monitoring parameter to be used together with acoustic rhinometry or rhinomanometry in the nasal provocation test for clinical purposes. Although significant nasonasal effects took place in the unilateral allergen challenge, the response was more prominent in the allergen-challenged than in the contralateral diluent-challenged nasal cavity in most allergic subjects.

Acoustics↗
PubMed1994

Acoustic rhinometry compared with posterior rhinomanometry in the measurement of histamine- and bradykinin-induced changes in nasal airway patency.

1. Acoustic rhinometry is a relatively new method for objectively assessing nasal airway patency. In this paper we compare acoustic rhinometry with active posterior rhinomanometry. 2. Twenty normal healthy volunteers underwent nasal challenge with either histamine or bradykinin, 100 micrograms to 1000 micrograms, and responses were assessed by acoustic rhinometry. A further 20 subjects received identical nasal challenges and responses were assessed by active posterior rhinomanometry. 3. On a subsequent occasion, the subjects challenged previously with histamine, were given the selective H1-receptor antagonist, cetirizine, 10 mg orally, 3 h before repeat nasal challenge with histamine, 100-1000 micrograms. Again, responses were assessed by active posterior rhinomanometry and acoustic rhinometry. 4. The acoustic reflection measurements and the nasal airway resistance measurements showed comparable, significant dose-related changes in nasal patency to both histamine and bradykinin. Pretreatment with cetirizine blocked the histamine-induced change in nasal patency as measured by both methods. 5. We conclude that acoustic rhinometry has a number of advantages over posterior rhinomanometry. It is quick to perform, requires minimal subject co-operation and gives a reliable objective, measurement of dose-related changes in nasal airway patency before and after pharmacological treatment.

Acoustics↗
PubMed1983

Surgery for nasal obstruction--evaluation by rhinomanometry.

Nasal obstruction is predominantly a subjective patient complaint. The physical examination of the nose for nasal obstruction is a subjective evaluation as well. While the history and physical examination are reasonable diagnostic indicators, an objective means of evaluation is needed. Rhinomanometry measures nasal obstruction objectively and reliably. Thirty-six patients with nasal obstruction were evaluated by rhinomanometry before and after nasal surgery. The results are reported here. Rhinomanometry confirms the effectiveness of intranasal surgery. Using rhinomanometry, various techniques of intranasal surgery are evaluated, and several interesting observations are made.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1979

Methodological aspects of rhinomanometry.

Rhinomanometry is an objective method for determining nasal patency; its reliability and relevance as an aid in defining and solving problems connected with nasal obstruction have, however, received scant attention. In the present study more than 200 subjects were submitted to rhinomanometry--most of them only by the posterior technique. In 50 of these subjects duplicate determinations of the pressure drop across the nose at the flow rate of 0.3 l/s were made within a short interval; the coefficient of variation was 20--25 per cent. The rhinomanometric values in a small group showed a day-to-day variation of 55 per cent. Because rhinomanometry allows only a moderate level of accuracy the method is unsuitable for detecting a borderline case. As the influence of the variability of the method is smaller in large materials, rhinomanometry is more suitable for comparison of groups than of individual patients.

Evaluation Studies as Topic↗
PubMed1998

Rhinoresistometry versus rhinomanometry--an evaluation.

Allergic nasal hyperreactivity is a common problem and many patients suffer from daily symptoms. Rhinomanometry is so far the only well established clinical method for objective assessment of nasal patency, although several expressions of nasal patency have been reported. Universal standardisation was achieved in 1983 in Brussels by Clement et al. [1], but many specialists are looking for a system giving more information on the functional aspects of the nose. A new development arising from active anterior rhinomanometry is rhinoresistometry. We tested this equipment, which has been introduced with new software for calculation and graphic presentation. 24 adult volunteers with proven allergy to grass pollen were examined immediately after long-term challenge in the Vienna Challenge Chamber [3] and 15 minutes after decongestion by application of 5% ephedrine solution. The similarity and differences between rhinomanometry and rhinoresistometry, as well as the value of the additional parameters are pointed out. Our data indicate that rhinoresistometry is a rapid, reproducible and non-invasive technique, which gives extended information in comparison to classic rhinomanometry. The results correlate very well with the findings obtained by the standard method. This pilot study demonstrates the benefit of the new parameters.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

[Nasal lavage, rhinomanometry and rhinoscopy in diagnosing occupational airway allergy].

The aim of the study was to estimate the usefulness of nasal lavage, rhinomanometry and rhynoscopy in diagnosing occupational allergic rhinitis and bronchial asthma. 26 subjects with suspected bronchial asthma and allergic rhinitis due to occupational allergens were examined. Each subject had medical history collected and underwent physical examination, skin prick tests (SPT) with common and occupational allergens, determination of total and specific IgE, specific bronchial or nasal provocation with determination of spirometric parameters, morphological and biochemical changes in nasal lavage fluid (NLF). Moreover the anterior rhinomanometry and rhynoscopy were performed before and after the provocation. A significant increase in the percentage of eosinophils and albumin was observed in NLF up till 24 hr after the specific challenge, but only in the group of 16 subjects with diagnosed occupational airway allergy. The authors observed also the presence of mucosal oedema and rhinorrhea in this group of patients more frequently than in the group of patients without diagnosed occupational airway disease. No significant changes were observed in the frequency of positive rhinomanometry test between the analysed groups of patients.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Current advances in rhinomanometry.

Current advances in rhinomanometry were reviewed in this paper. Active posterior rhinomanometry with a "head-out" body plethysmography may be the least invasive method currently available for measuring nasal patency. In general, active anterior rhinomanometry with a face mask or a nasal nozzle has been employed in various studies throughout the world. Nasal resistance as calculated from the equation R = 0.78 (delta P/V)1.33 at any points on a pressure/flow curve, or averaged nasal resistance may be the most suitable expression for nasal patency. Values for nasal resistance at delta P 100 Pa in Japanese patients or delta P 150 Pa in Caucasians have been widely employed as standard objective data for nasal obstruction, although rhinomanometric results sometimes do not agree with subjective evaluation of nasal obstruction. Nasal airflow acceleration or peak flow index during nasal breathing at rest can be applied as warranted to confirm an objective diagnosis of symptomatic nasal obstruction. Further, nationality and anthropological characteristics can be related to the severity and type of stuffiness.

Humans↗