![Sample our Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing & Allied Health journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5944/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Medicine-Dentistry-Nursing-Allied-Health.jpg"})
Abstract
Background and objective. Measuring the fraction of nitric oxide in exhaled breath (FENO) is increasingly utilized to assess airway inflammation in asthma. The primary aim of this study was to compare exhaled nitric oxide measurements obtained using two devices from different manufacturers, that is, the recently marketed portable and electrochemical-based Medisoft HypAir FENO and the well-established chemiluminescence-based Aerocrine NIOX analyzer, in an unselected population. Methods. FENO measurements were conducted in 106 subjects (86 healthy; 20 asthmatic; 56.6% atopic). Atopy and health status were assessed by skin prick tests and questionnaire, respectively. Results. The two instruments showed strong correlation over a wide range of FENO measurements (8–261.3 ppb with the HypAir, 5.6–156.8 ppb with the NIOX; r = 0.98; p < .0001). This correlation was observed in the population as a whole, as well as in healthy non-atopics, healthy atopics, and atopic asthmatics when considered separately. The measurements on the HypAir FENO were consistently 1.6 times (95% CI 1.11–2.05) higher than those obtained with the NIOX. Conclusions. FENO measurements obtained with the HypAir FENO correlated well with the NIOX, but were approximately 1.6 times higher. Therefore, a conversion factor is required if results are to be compared with the NIOX instrument.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank all the participants from the three institutes involved with the study.
Declaration of Interest
We report no conflicts of interest. We would also like to confirm that we have received no support from either manufacturer with this study, and have no financial interest in either Medisoft or Aerocrine. We alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.