liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Efficacy of two breath condensers
Linköping University, Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, Clinical Physiology . Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Östergötlands Läns Landsting, Heart Centre, Department of Clinical Physiology.
Linköping University, Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, Clinical Physiology . Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. Östergötlands Läns Landsting, Heart Centre, Department of Clinical Physiology.
2010 (English)In: Journal of clinical laboratory analysis (Print), ISSN 0887-8013, E-ISSN 1098-2825, Vol. 24, no 4, 219-223 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Examination of Exhaled Breath Condensate has been suggested to give information about inflammatory airway diseases. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to compare efficacy and variability in gain of two commercially available exhaled breath condensers, ECoScreen and RTube in an in vitro set up. METHODS: Test fluids containing myeloperoxidase (MPO) or human neutrophil lipocalin (HNL) in addition to saline and bovine serum albumin were nebulized and aerosols were transferred by a servo ventilator to either of the two condensers. Analyses of MPO, HNL, or chlorine were done by means of ELISA, RIA, or a modified adsorbed organic halogen technique (AOX), respectively. RESULTS: Recoveries of HNL were higher when using ECoScreen than RTube (Pandlt;0.05). In contrast, there were no significant differences between the two condensers in recoveries of MPO or chlorine. The spread of data was wide regarding all tested compounds. CONCLUSION: Variability in gain was large and ECoScreen was more efficacious then RTube in condensing the tested solutes of HNL, but not those of MPO or chlorine.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 24, no 4, 219-223 p.
Keyword [en]
Chlorine, HNL, MPO, exhaled breath condensate, efficacy
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-58821DOI: 10.1002/jcla.20389OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-58821DiVA: diva2:345867
Available from: 2010-08-27 Created: 2010-08-27 Last updated: 2017-12-12

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Davidsson, AnetteSchmekel, Birgitta

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Davidsson, AnetteSchmekel, Birgitta
By organisation
Clinical Physiology Faculty of Health SciencesDepartment of Clinical Physiology
In the same journal
Journal of clinical laboratory analysis (Print)
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 49 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf