Uğur DAL, Sena ERDAL, İbrahim AKKURT

Sporcularda metakolin ve egzersiz bronkoprovokasyon testleri sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması

Bronşların spesifik ue nonspesifık çeşitli ajanlara karşı verdikleri abartılı kasılma cevabına, bronş aşırı cevaplılığı adı verilmektedir. Çalışmamızda, bronş aşırı cevaplılığını değerlendirmek için kullanılan egzersiz bronkoprovokasyon testi ve metakolin bronkoprovokasyon testini sporculara (grup I) ve sedanterlere (grup II) uygulayıp sonuçlarını karşılaştırdık. Ortam koşulları (sıcaklık ve nem), yaşları, boy ve kilo ölçümleri arasında istatistiksel olarak fark bulunmayan deneklerin metakolin bronkoprovokasyon testine verdikleri yanıtlar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulundu (p< 0.05). Egzersiz bronkoprovokasyon testi sonuçlarında ise iki grup arasında istatistiksel olarak fark saptanmadı (p> 0.05). Grup l'deki bireylerin metakolin bronkoprovokasyon testine verdikleri maksimum FEV1 azalma değeri ile egzersiz bronkoprovokasyon testine verdikleri yanıt arasında pozitif yönlü bir korelasyon görüldü (r= 0.60, p< 0.05). Grup II'de ise böyle bir korelasyon yoktu (p> 0.05). Allerjik durumu belirlemek için kullandığımız parametreler (total IgE, eozinofil sayısı, atopik birey sayısı) yönünden iki grup arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı fark bulunmadı (p> 0.05). Her iki gruptaki bireylerin metakolin bronkoprovokasyon testine verdikleri maksimum FEV1 azalması yanıtı ile egzersiz bronkoprovokasyon testine verdikleri yanıt arasındaki fark istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bulundu (p< 0.05). Elde ettiğimiz verilerden bronş hiperreaktivitesini değerlendirmede; sporcularda ve sedanterlerde metakolin bronkoprovokasyon testinin, egzersiz bronkoprovokasyon testine göre daha duyarlı olduğu sonucuna varıldı.

The comparison of the result of exercise bronchoprovocation test and methacholine bronchoprovocation test in athletes

The excess contraction respond of the bronchiols to the specific and non-specific agent is called bronchial hyperresponsiveness. In our study we compared the result of exercise bronchoprovocation test and methacholine bronchoprovocation test in athletes (group I) and in sedentary subjects (group II). The subjects that their age, height, weight and environmental sta-. tus of the test room (temperature and humidity) were not statistically different, they gave statistically different respond to the methacholine bronchoprovocation test (p< 0.05). Their respond to exercise bronchoprovocation test was similar and there was no statistically difference between two groups (p> 0.05). In group I, there was a correlation in the result of exercise bronchoprovocation test and methacholine bronchoprovocation test (r= 0.60, p< 0.05), but in group II there was no correlation in this two tests. The parameters that we use for evaluation of the allergic status (total IgE, eosinophil count, number ofatopic subject in groups) were not statistically different (p> 0.05). In both two groups there was a statistically different respond in the result of exercise bronchoprovocation test and methacholine bronchoprovocation test. These findings sug-gests that methacholine bronchoprouocation test is a more sensitive test for the diagnosis of BHR in athletes and sedantery subjects than exercise bronchoprouocation test.

PDF

___

1. Kalyoncu AF. Bronş Astması 2001. 1. Baskı. Ankara: At- las Kitapçılık, 2001: 243.
2. Mc Ardle WD. Exercise Physiology: Energy, and Human Performance. 4th ed. USA: Williams and Wilkins, 1996: 217-31.
3. Langdeau BJ, Turcotte H, Bowie MD, et al. Airway hper- responsiveness in elite athletes. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000; 161: 1479-84.
4. Langdeau BJ, Boulet PL. Is asthma over-or under-diagno- sed in athletes? Respiratory Medicine 2003; 97: 109-14.
5. Sherwood L. Human Physiology. 2nd. USA: West Publis- hing Company, 1989: 422-7.
6. Cabral A, Conceicao GM, Gudes F, et al. Exercise-indu- ced bronchospasm in children effects of asthma severity. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1999; 159: 1819-23.
7. Gosthall WR. Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. Drugs 2002; 62: 1725-39.
8. Anderson S, Holzer K. Exercise- induced asthma is it the right diagnosis in elite athletes? J Allergy Clin Immunol 2000; 106: 419-28.
9. Holzer K, Anderson S, Douglass J. Exercise in elite sum- mer athletes: challenges for diagnosis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002; 110:374-80.
10. American Thoracic Society. Guidelines for methacholine and exercise challenge testlng-1999. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000; 1161: 309-29.
11. Braun-Falco O, Plewig G, Wolff HH, Burgdorf WHC. Dermatitis in; Dermatology. 2th ed. New York: Springer Verlag, 1996:585-611.
12. Langdeau JB, Boulet PL. Prevelance and mechanisms of development of asthma and airway hyperresponsiveness in athletism. Sports Med 2001; 31: 601-16.
13. Rundell KW, Im J, Mayers LB, Wilber RL, et al. Self-reported symptoms and ElA in the elite athlete. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 208-13.
14. Ross RG. The prevalence of reversible airway obstruction in professional football players. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 1985-9.
15. Nystad W, Harris J, Borgen JS. Asthma and wheezing among Norwegian elite athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32:266-70.
16. Rundell KW, Jenkinson DM. Exercise-induced bronchospasm in the elite athlete. Sports Med 2002; 32: 583-600.
17. Millqvist E, Bengtsson U, Lowhagen O. Combining a beta2-agonist with a face mask to prevent exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. Allergy 2000; 55: 672-5.
18. Scollo M, Zanconato S, Ongaro R, et al. Exhaled nitric oxide and exercise-induced bronchonstriction in asthmatic children. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000; 161: 1047-50.
19. Kalyon TA. Spor Hekimliği. 3. baskı. Ankara: Gata Basımevi, 1995; 1:28-32.
20. Chupp GL. Pulmonary function testing. Clin Chest Med 2001; 22:599-859.
21. Wilber RL, Rundell KW, Szmedra L, et al. Incidence of exercise-induced bronchospasm in Olympic winter sport athletes. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 732-7.
22. Rundell KW, Wilber RL, Szmedra L, et al. Exercise-induced asthma screening of elite athletes: field versus laboratory exercise challenge. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 309-16.
23. Rundell KW, Splering BA. Inspiratory stridor in elite athletes. Chest 2003; 123: 468-74.
24. Thaminy A, Lamblin C, Perez T, et al. Increased frequency of asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness in nonasthmatic patients with food allergy. Eur Respir J 2000; 16: 1091-4.
25. Chinn S. Methodology of bronchial responsiveness. Thorax 1998; 53: 984-8.
26. Anderson SD, Brannan JD. Methods for indirect challenge tests including exercise, eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea and hypertonic aerosols. Clin Rev in Allergy Immunol 2003; 24: 27-54.
27. Carlsen KH, Engh G, Mork M. Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction depends on exercise load. Respir Med 2000; 94: 750-5.
28. Kolnaar BG, Folgerlng H, van den Hoogen HJ, van Weel C. Asymptomatic bronchial hyperresponsiveness in adolescents and young adults. Eur Respir J 1997; 10: 44-50.
29. Laprise C, Boulet LP. Asymptomatic airway hyperresponsiveness: a three-year follow-up. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997; 156: 403-9.
30. Mannix ET, Manfredi F, Farber MO. A comparison of two challenge tests for identifying exercise-induced bronchospasm in figure skaters. Chest 1999; 115: 649-53.
31. Godfrey S, Springer C, Bar-Yishay E, Avital A. Cut off points defining normal and asthmatic bronchial reactivity to exercise and inhalation challenges in children and young adults. Eur Respir J 1999; 14: 659-68.
32. Sonna LA, Angel CK, Sharp AM, et al. The prevalance of among US army recruits and its effects on physical performance. Chest 2001; 119: 1676-84.
33. Kaplan AT. Egzersizle oluşan bronkospazmda egzersiz testi. Spor ve Tıp 1995; 11:22-6.
34. Thole RT, Sallis RE, Rubin AL, Smith GN. Exercise-induced bronchospasm prevalence in collegiate cross-country runners. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 1641-6.