1.Measurement of Exhaled Nitric Oxide in Children: A Comparison Between NObreath® and NIOX VERO® Analyzers.
Yoko INOUE ; Sakura SATO ; Tetsuharu MANABE ; Eishi MAKITA ; Masako CHIYOTANDA ; Kyohei TAKAHASHI ; Hitoshi YAMAMOTO ; Noriyuki YANAGIDA ; Motohiro EBISAWA
Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Research 2018;10(5):478-489
PURPOSE: Few studies have compared fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) measurement by NIOX VERO® (NOV) and other devices in children. Moreover, there is no agreement between differences in FeNO values obtained using different devices in adults. Here, we compared FeNO values obtained using NOV and NObreath® (NOB) systems to derive a correction equation for children. METHODS: Eighty-eight participants (age 7–15 years) who were diagnosed with atopic bronchial asthma and visited Sagamihara National Hospital as outpatients between January and April of 2017 were included. We measured FeNO values obtained using NOB and NOV, and analyzed them using Wilcoxon tests and Altman-Bland plots. RESULTS: The median age of the participants was 11.5 years, and the scored Asthma Control Test (ACT) or Childhood ACT (C-ACT) was 25 (interquartile range, 24–25) or 26 (24–27). NOB and NOV values were significantly different (31 [14–52] versus 36 [20–59] ppb; P = 0.020) and strongly correlated (r = 0.92). An equation to convert NOB values into NOV values was derived using linear regression as follows: log NOV = 0.7329 × log NOB + 0.4704; NOB for 20, 40, 58, 80 and 100 ppb corresponded to NOV for 27, 44, 59, 73 and 86 ppb. Thus, NOB < 58 ppb suggested NOB < NOV, whereas NOB > 58 ppb suggested NOB > NOV. CONCLUSIONS: NOB and NOV values were strongly correlated. Participants whose FeNO values were relatively low represented NOB < NOV, whereas those whose FeNO values were relatively high represented NOB > NOV.
Adult
;
Asthma
;
Child*
;
Exhalation
;
Humans
;
Linear Models
;
Nitric Oxide*
;
Outpatients
2.Outcome of intradiscal condoliase injection therapy for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation
Noritaka SUZUKI ; Yawara EGUCHI ; Takashi HIRAI ; Takuya TAKAHASHI ; Yohei TAKAHASHI ; Kota WATANABE ; Tomohiro BANNO ; Kyohei SAKAKI ; Satoshi MAKI ; Yuuichi TAKANO ; Yuki TANIGUCHI ; Yasuchika AOKI ; Takamitsu KONISHI ; Yutaka HIRAIZUMI ; Masatsune YAMAGATA ; Akihiro HIRAKAWA ; Seiji OHTORI
Asian Spine Journal 2024;18(4):550-559
Methods:
The study participants were 249 patients who underwent intradiscal condoliase injection for LDH at nine participating institutions, including 241 patients with initial LDH (group C) and eight with recurrent LDH (group R). Patient characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, disease duration, intervertebral LDH level, smoking history, and diabetes history were evaluated. Low back pain/leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment.
Results:
Low back pain NRS scores (before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment, respectively) in group C (4.9 → 2.6 → 1.8) showed significant improvement until 1 year after treatment. Although a tendency for improvement was observed in group R (3.5 → 2.8 → 2.2), no significant difference was noted. Groups C (6.6 → 2.4 → 1.4) and R (7.0 → 3.1 → 3.2) showed significant improvement in the leg pain NRS scores after treatment. Group C (41.4 → 19.5 → 13.7) demonstrated significant improvement in the ODI up to 1 year after treatment; however, no significant difference was found in group R (35.7 → 31.7 → 26.4).
Conclusions
Although intradiscal condoliase injection is less effective for LDH recurrence than for initial cases, it is useful for improving leg pain and can be considered a minimally invasive and safe treatment method.
3.Outcome of intradiscal condoliase injection therapy for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation
Noritaka SUZUKI ; Yawara EGUCHI ; Takashi HIRAI ; Takuya TAKAHASHI ; Yohei TAKAHASHI ; Kota WATANABE ; Tomohiro BANNO ; Kyohei SAKAKI ; Satoshi MAKI ; Yuuichi TAKANO ; Yuki TANIGUCHI ; Yasuchika AOKI ; Takamitsu KONISHI ; Yutaka HIRAIZUMI ; Masatsune YAMAGATA ; Akihiro HIRAKAWA ; Seiji OHTORI
Asian Spine Journal 2024;18(4):550-559
Methods:
The study participants were 249 patients who underwent intradiscal condoliase injection for LDH at nine participating institutions, including 241 patients with initial LDH (group C) and eight with recurrent LDH (group R). Patient characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, disease duration, intervertebral LDH level, smoking history, and diabetes history were evaluated. Low back pain/leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment.
Results:
Low back pain NRS scores (before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment, respectively) in group C (4.9 → 2.6 → 1.8) showed significant improvement until 1 year after treatment. Although a tendency for improvement was observed in group R (3.5 → 2.8 → 2.2), no significant difference was noted. Groups C (6.6 → 2.4 → 1.4) and R (7.0 → 3.1 → 3.2) showed significant improvement in the leg pain NRS scores after treatment. Group C (41.4 → 19.5 → 13.7) demonstrated significant improvement in the ODI up to 1 year after treatment; however, no significant difference was found in group R (35.7 → 31.7 → 26.4).
Conclusions
Although intradiscal condoliase injection is less effective for LDH recurrence than for initial cases, it is useful for improving leg pain and can be considered a minimally invasive and safe treatment method.
4.Outcome of intradiscal condoliase injection therapy for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation
Noritaka SUZUKI ; Yawara EGUCHI ; Takashi HIRAI ; Takuya TAKAHASHI ; Yohei TAKAHASHI ; Kota WATANABE ; Tomohiro BANNO ; Kyohei SAKAKI ; Satoshi MAKI ; Yuuichi TAKANO ; Yuki TANIGUCHI ; Yasuchika AOKI ; Takamitsu KONISHI ; Yutaka HIRAIZUMI ; Masatsune YAMAGATA ; Akihiro HIRAKAWA ; Seiji OHTORI
Asian Spine Journal 2024;18(4):550-559
Methods:
The study participants were 249 patients who underwent intradiscal condoliase injection for LDH at nine participating institutions, including 241 patients with initial LDH (group C) and eight with recurrent LDH (group R). Patient characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, disease duration, intervertebral LDH level, smoking history, and diabetes history were evaluated. Low back pain/leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment.
Results:
Low back pain NRS scores (before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment, respectively) in group C (4.9 → 2.6 → 1.8) showed significant improvement until 1 year after treatment. Although a tendency for improvement was observed in group R (3.5 → 2.8 → 2.2), no significant difference was noted. Groups C (6.6 → 2.4 → 1.4) and R (7.0 → 3.1 → 3.2) showed significant improvement in the leg pain NRS scores after treatment. Group C (41.4 → 19.5 → 13.7) demonstrated significant improvement in the ODI up to 1 year after treatment; however, no significant difference was found in group R (35.7 → 31.7 → 26.4).
Conclusions
Although intradiscal condoliase injection is less effective for LDH recurrence than for initial cases, it is useful for improving leg pain and can be considered a minimally invasive and safe treatment method.
5.Outcome of intradiscal condoliase injection therapy for patients with recurrent lumbar disc herniation
Noritaka SUZUKI ; Yawara EGUCHI ; Takashi HIRAI ; Takuya TAKAHASHI ; Yohei TAKAHASHI ; Kota WATANABE ; Tomohiro BANNO ; Kyohei SAKAKI ; Satoshi MAKI ; Yuuichi TAKANO ; Yuki TANIGUCHI ; Yasuchika AOKI ; Takamitsu KONISHI ; Yutaka HIRAIZUMI ; Masatsune YAMAGATA ; Akihiro HIRAKAWA ; Seiji OHTORI
Asian Spine Journal 2024;18(4):550-559
Methods:
The study participants were 249 patients who underwent intradiscal condoliase injection for LDH at nine participating institutions, including 241 patients with initial LDH (group C) and eight with recurrent LDH (group R). Patient characteristics including age, sex, body mass index, disease duration, intervertebral LDH level, smoking history, and diabetes history were evaluated. Low back pain/leg pain Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) scores and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used to evaluate clinical symptoms before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment.
Results:
Low back pain NRS scores (before treatment and at 6 months and 1 year after treatment, respectively) in group C (4.9 → 2.6 → 1.8) showed significant improvement until 1 year after treatment. Although a tendency for improvement was observed in group R (3.5 → 2.8 → 2.2), no significant difference was noted. Groups C (6.6 → 2.4 → 1.4) and R (7.0 → 3.1 → 3.2) showed significant improvement in the leg pain NRS scores after treatment. Group C (41.4 → 19.5 → 13.7) demonstrated significant improvement in the ODI up to 1 year after treatment; however, no significant difference was found in group R (35.7 → 31.7 → 26.4).
Conclusions
Although intradiscal condoliase injection is less effective for LDH recurrence than for initial cases, it is useful for improving leg pain and can be considered a minimally invasive and safe treatment method.