Reduced pH and chloride levels in exhaled breath condensate of patients with chronic cough

A Niimi, L T Nguyen, O Usmani, B Mann, K F Chung, A Niimi, L T Nguyen, O Usmani, B Mann, K F Chung

Abstract

Background: Increased hydrogen and reduced chloride ionic environments of the airways are conducive to the stimulation of cough. However, the constituents of the local milieu of the airways of patients with chronic cough are unknown.

Methods: The pH and chloride levels in exhaled breath condensate and capsaicin cough threshold (C5) were measured in 50 patients with chronic cough and in 16 healthy controls. pH and chloride measurements were repeated after capsaicin challenge in those with cough. The cause of cough was asthma (n = 13), postnasal drip/rhinitis (n = 7), gastro-oesophageal reflux (n = 5), bronchiectasis (n = 5), but remained unidentified in 20.

Results: Compared with controls, patients with chronic cough had lower pH (mean 7.9 v 8.3, 95% CI of difference -0.5 to -0.2, p<0.0001), chloride levels (median 4 v 6 mmol/l, 95% CI -3.1 to -0.2, p = 0.007), and C5 (median 3.9 v 125 micro M, 95% CI -270.0 to -17.6, p = 0.002). The pH levels were different in the six subgroups including controls, and were reduced in all diagnostic subgroups of patients with cough compared with controls but did not differ between them. Chloride levels were significantly different in the six subgroups but were lower than controls in only the gastro-oesophageal reflux subgroup. There was a weak but significant correlation between chloride levels and C5 when all participants were analysed together, but not between pH and C5 or chloride levels. pH and chloride levels did not change after capsaicin challenge.

Conclusions: The epithelial lining fluid of patients with chronic cough has a reduced pH and reduced chloride levels which could contribute to the enhanced cough reflex.

References

    1. Thorax. 2002 Feb;57(2):178-82
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 Jan 1;165(1):101-7
    1. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2002 Jul;11(7):955-63
    1. Pulm Pharmacol Ther. 2002;15(3):253-9
    1. J Physiol. 2002 Sep 1;543(Pt 2):591-600
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 Oct 1;166(7):961-4
    1. Thorax. 2002 Nov;57(11):926-9
    1. Eur Respir J. 2003 Jan;21(1):37-42
    1. Thorax. 2003 Jun;58(6):528-32
    1. Clin Sci (Lond). 1988 Apr;74(4):373-6
    1. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990 Mar;141(3):640-7
    1. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1990 Jul;142(1):143-6
    1. Eur Respir J. 1992 Mar;5(3):296-300
    1. Chest. 1993 Feb;103(2):488-95
    1. Pulm Pharmacol. 1993 Sep;6(3):171-5
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1994 Feb;149(2 Pt 1):482-9
    1. J Physiol. 1995 Jan 1;482 ( Pt 1):179-87
    1. Neuroscience. 1995 Aug;67(3):741-52
    1. Chest. 1996 Apr;109(4):1043-8
    1. Postgrad Med J. 1996 Oct;72(852):594-8
    1. Eur Respir J. 1998 Mar;11(3):702-5
    1. Eur Respir J. 1998 May;11(5):1064-9
    1. Neuron. 1998 Sep;21(3):531-43
    1. Thorax. 1999 Mar;54(3):234-7
    1. Respir Med. 1999 Jan;93(1):58-61
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000 Mar;161(3 Pt 1):694-9
    1. Eur Respir J. 1999 Jan;13(1):59-65
    1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 Jul 5;97(14):8134-9
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 May 15;165(10):1364-70
    1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Jul 3;98(14):8119-23
    1. Lancet. 2000 Aug 12;356(9229):564-5
    1. Am J Med. 2000 Jan;108(1):73-82
    1. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001 Jun;163(7):1693-722

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj