ATS Pulmonary Function Laboratory Manual

CHAPTER  12

3.6 The testing room must have adequate ventilation (i.e., at least two air exchanges/hour). 3.7 Other optional methods to reduce methacholine exposure for the technician include using low- resistance filters, supplemental local exhaust ventilation, and/or a HEPA room air cleaner. REFERENCES 1. Expert Panel Report (EPR) 3: Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of asthma – Full Report, 2007. NIH Publication No. 07–4051. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; National Institutes of Health; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Asthma Education and Prevention Program, August, 2007. 2. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health. International consensus report on diagnosis and treatment of asthma. Bethesda, MD: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health. Publication no. 92-3091, March 1992. Eur Respir J 1992;5:601–641. 3. Crapo RO, Casaburi R, Coates AL, Enright PL, Hankinson JL, Irvin CG, MacIntyre NR, McKay RT, Wanger JS, Anderson SD, et al .; American Thoracic Society. Guidelines for methacholine and exer- cise challenge testing-1999. This official statement of the American Thoracic Society was adopted by the ATS Board of Directors, July 1999. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:309–329. 4. Cockcroft DW, Davis BE, Todd DC, Smycniuk AJ. Methacholine challenge: comparison of two meth- ods. Chest 2005;127:839–844. 5. Prieto L, Ferrer A, Domenech J, Pérez-Francés C. Effect of challenge method on sensitivity, reactivity, and maximal response to methacholine. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2006;97:175–181. 6. Allen ND, Davis BE, Hurst TS, Cockcroft DW. Difference between dosimeter and tidal breath- ing methacholine challenge: contributions of dose and deep inspiration bronchoprotection. Chest 2005;128:4018–4023. 7. Cockcroft DW, Davis BE. The bronchoprotective effect of inhaling methacholine by using total lung capacity inspirations has a marked influence on the interpretation of the test result. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;117:1244–1248. 8. Peters GE, Davis BE, Cockcroft DW. Comparison of doubling and quadrupling methacholine con- centration regimens using the tidal volume method. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2011;106:74–76. 9. Cockcroft DW, Davis BE. Mechanisms of airway hyperresponsiveness. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2006;118:551–559, quiz 560–561. 10. Coates AL, Wanger J, Cockcroft DW, Culver BH, Carlsen K-H, Diamant Z, Gauvreau G, Hall GL, Hallstrand TS, Horvath I, et al . ERS technical standard on bronchial challenge testing: general con- siderations and performance of methacholine challenge tests. Eur Respir J 2017;49:1601526. 11. Miller MR, Hankinson JL, Brusasco V, Burgos F, Casaburi R, Coates A, Crapo R, Enright P, van der Grinten CP, Gustafsson P, et al .; ATS/ERS Task Force. Standardisation of spirometry. Eur Respir J 2005;26:319–338. 12. Sherman CB, Kern DG, Corwin RW, Andrus B. A clinical and structural comparison of industrial methacholine and provocholine. Chest 1994;105:1095–1097. 13. Hayes RD, Beach JR, Rutherford DM, Sim MR. Stability of methacholine chloride solutions under different storage conditions over a 9 month period. Eur Respir J 1998;11:946–948. 14. Subcommittee on Bronchial Inhalation Challenges. Guidelines for bronchial inhalation challenges with pharmacologic and antigenic agents. ATS News 1980;Spring:11–19.

133