J. Kesavanathan et al., EVALUATION OF ACOUSTIC RHINOMETRY AND POSTERIOR RHINOMANOMETRY AS TOOLS FOR INHALATION CHALLENGE STUDIES, Journal of toxicology and environmental health, 48(3), 1996, pp. 295-307
Objective measures of upper respiratory function are needed to underst
and the effects of inhaled toxicants on the nasal passages. Acoustic r
hinometry (AR) isa simple new technique that determines nasal volume b
y measuring the cross-sectional area of the upper airway as a function
of the distance along the nasal passage. This study compares acoustic
rhinometry with the more traditional posterior rhinomanometry (NAR) a
nd correlates these objective measures with the symptom of nasal conge
stion. Healthy young adults (n = 29) were studied on 4 days, each sepa
rated by at least I wk, in a climate-controlled environmental chamber
for 6 h, with exposure to clean air or sidestream tobacco smoke (SS) (
2 h, 1, 5, and 15 ppm CO). The coefficient of variation for single mea
surements was 8-15% (AR) and 4% (NAR); for across-day measurements it
was 15-25% (AR) and 13-75% (NAR); and for between days it was 19-27% A
R and 17-21% (NAR). These coefficients were similar in subjects with a
history of environmental tobacco smoke sensitivity (ETS-S) and those
with no history oi ETS sensitivity (ETS-NS). At baseline, the percepti
on of unilateral nasal congestion was significantly correlated with un
ilateral nasal dimensions or nasal resistance; the symptom of baseline
bilateral nasal congestion (estimated for both nasal passages simulta
neously) correlated less well with objective measures of nasal patency
. Under challenge conditions (SS at 1-15 ppm CO), there were typically
significant correlations between changes in unilateral congestion and
both unilateral rhinom-anometry and acoustic rhinometry, but correlat
ions of bilateral congestion and measurable dimensions were much lower
. ETS-S and ETS-NS subjects differed in correlations between bilateral
subjective and objective measures: ETS-S subjects showed significant
correlation between baseline congestion and NAR; in contrast, ETS-NS s
ubjects showed significant correlation between baseline congestion and
acoustic rhinometry. These results indicate that NAR and AR are compl
ementary tests for use in inhalation challenge studies and have differ
ent correlations with nasal congestion under baseline and challenge co
nditions.