Advancing cough research: Methodological insights into cough challenge in guinea pig models using double chamber vs whole-body plethysmography

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PHYSIOLOGY Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology Pub Date : 2024-07-16 DOI:10.1016/j.resp.2024.104302
Jana Plevkova , Janka Jakusova , Mariana Brozmanova , Zuzana Biringerova , Tomas Buday
{"title":"Advancing cough research: Methodological insights into cough challenge in guinea pig models using double chamber vs whole-body plethysmography","authors":"Jana Plevkova ,&nbsp;Janka Jakusova ,&nbsp;Mariana Brozmanova ,&nbsp;Zuzana Biringerova ,&nbsp;Tomas Buday","doi":"10.1016/j.resp.2024.104302","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study compares two methods of citric acid-induced cough in guinea pigs in whole-body plethysmography (WBP) and double chamber plethysmography (DCP) to evaluate their efficacy.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Sixteen specific pathogen-free (SPF) and sixteen conventionally-bred (CON) animals were exposed to 0.4 M citric acid aerosol. They underwent cough provocation using both DCP and WBP methods. The number of coughs and latency to the first cough were recorded and analysed using statistical methods to determine significant differences between the two techniques.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>WBP resulted in significantly higher cough counts (WBP vs. DCP: 13±9 vs 2±3 for SPF; 14±8 vs 5±5 for CON; p&lt;0.0001) and shorter latency (WBP vs. DCP: 59±6 s vs 159±14 s for SPF; 77±4 s vs 112±12 s for CON; p&lt;0.0001) compared to DCP in both groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Methodological differences substantially impact cough responses. WBP provides a more reliable and physiologically relevant methodology for cough assessment, suggesting the need for standardized protocols in cough research to enhance translational relevance.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":20961,"journal":{"name":"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology","volume":"327 ","pages":"Article 104302"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1569904824000958","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This study compares two methods of citric acid-induced cough in guinea pigs in whole-body plethysmography (WBP) and double chamber plethysmography (DCP) to evaluate their efficacy.

Methods

Sixteen specific pathogen-free (SPF) and sixteen conventionally-bred (CON) animals were exposed to 0.4 M citric acid aerosol. They underwent cough provocation using both DCP and WBP methods. The number of coughs and latency to the first cough were recorded and analysed using statistical methods to determine significant differences between the two techniques.

Results

WBP resulted in significantly higher cough counts (WBP vs. DCP: 13±9 vs 2±3 for SPF; 14±8 vs 5±5 for CON; p<0.0001) and shorter latency (WBP vs. DCP: 59±6 s vs 159±14 s for SPF; 77±4 s vs 112±12 s for CON; p<0.0001) compared to DCP in both groups.

Conclusion

Methodological differences substantially impact cough responses. WBP provides a more reliable and physiologically relevant methodology for cough assessment, suggesting the need for standardized protocols in cough research to enhance translational relevance.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
推进咳嗽研究:豚鼠模型咳嗽挑战中使用双腔与全身褶压计的方法论启示
目的:本研究比较了全身胸透(WBP)和双室胸透(DCP)两种柠檬酸诱导豚鼠咳嗽的方法,以评估其有效性:方法:16 只无特定病原体(SPF)和 16 只常规饲养(CON)的豚鼠暴露于 0.4M 柠檬酸气溶胶中。采用 DCP 和 WBP 两种方法对它们进行咳嗽诱发试验。记录咳嗽次数和第一次咳嗽的潜伏期,并使用统计方法进行分析,以确定两种方法之间的显著差异:结果:WBP 导致的咳嗽次数明显更高(WBP 与 DCP 相比:SPF 为 13±9 对 2±3;CON 为 14±8 对 5±5;P 结论:方法差异对咳嗽反应有很大影响:方法差异对咳嗽反应有很大影响。WBP 为咳嗽评估提供了一种更可靠、更符合生理学原理的方法,这表明咳嗽研究需要标准化方案,以提高转化相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
104
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Respiratory Physiology & Neurobiology (RESPNB) publishes original articles and invited reviews concerning physiology and pathophysiology of respiration in its broadest sense. Although a special focus is on topics in neurobiology, high quality papers in respiratory molecular and cellular biology are also welcome, as are high-quality papers in traditional areas, such as: -Mechanics of breathing- Gas exchange and acid-base balance- Respiration at rest and exercise- Respiration in unusual conditions, like high or low pressure or changes of temperature, low ambient oxygen- Embryonic and adult respiration- Comparative respiratory physiology. Papers on clinical aspects, original methods, as well as theoretical papers are also considered as long as they foster the understanding of respiratory physiology and pathophysiology.
期刊最新文献
TRPA1 contributes to respiratory depression from tobacco aerosol. THE ACUTE EFFECT OF BILATERAL CATHODIC TRANSCRANIAL DIRECT CURRENT STIMULATION ON RESPIRATORY MUSCLE STRENGTH AND ENDURANCE. Glycolytic metabolism modulation on spinal neuroinflammation and vital functions following cervical spinal cord injury. Impact of microbial diversity on inflammatory cytokines and respiratory pattern measured in whole-body plethysmography in guinea pig models. Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1