596
Views
16
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Diagnosis

Diagnostic accuracy of fractional exhaled nitric oxide in asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

, MD, PhD, , MD, PhD, , MD, PhD & , MD
Pages 404-412 | Received 10 Apr 2015, Accepted 24 Sep 2015, Published online: 21 Jan 2016
 

Abstract

Background: Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) has been proposed as a non-invasive measure of airway inflammation in asthma. However, its accuracy for the diagnosis of asthma in different populations is not completely clear. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of FeNO measurement for the diagnosis of asthma through a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Methods: A systematic search current to July 2014 was performed in Pubmed, EMBASE, Medline, the Cochrane databases, CNKI, Wanfang and Weipu to find relevant studies. All prospective studies on the use of FeNO for the diagnosis of asthma were included. Results: Twenty-five studies including 3983 subjects were analyzed. The pooled sensitivity, specificity and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for the entire population was 72% (95% CI, 70–74%), 78% (95% CI, 76–80%) and 15.92 (95% CI, 10.70–23.68), respectively. The area under the summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curves revealed a receiver-operating characteristic of 0.88. In subgroup analysis, the DOR for patients using corticosteroids, as well as those for steroid-naïve, non-smoking, smoking, chronic cough and allergic rhinitis patients were 4.47 (95% CI, 3.39–5.90), 21.40 (95% CI, 15.38–29.76), 19.84 (95% CI, 15.63–25.19), 5.41 (95% CI, 2.97–9.86), 35.36 (95% CI, 23.90–52.29), and 2.99 (95% CI, 0.85–10.45), respectively. Conclusion: FeNO is accurate for the diagnosis of asthma in steroid-naive or non-smoking patients, particularly in chronic cough patients.

Acknowledgements

We thank Jeff Johnson (Scientific Writing Solutions, Boston, USA) for his edition of the manuscript.

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Supplementary material available online Supplemental Figures S1–S3

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.