Impact of a Short-Term Water Abstinence on Airway Hyperresponsiveness in Elite Swimmers

Unsupervised field-based exercise challenge tests to support the detection of exercise-induced lower airway dysfunction in athletes

Background

Athletes are at risk for developing exercise-induced lower airway narrowing. The diagnostic assessment of such lower airway dysfunction (LAD) requires an objective bronchial provocation test (BPT).

Objectives

Our primary aim was to assess if unsupervised field-based exercise challenge tests (ECTs) could confirm LAD by using app-based spirometry. We also aimed to evaluate the diagnostic test performance of field-based and sport-specific ECTs, compared with established eucapnic voluntary hyperpnoea (EVH) and methacholine BPT.

Methods

In athletes with LAD symptoms, sensitivity and specificity analyses were performed to compare outcomes of (1) standardised field-based 8 min ECT at 85% maximal heart rate with forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁) measured prechallenge and 1 min, 3 min, 5 min, 10 min, 15 min and 30 min postchallenge, (2) unstandardised field-based sport-specific ECT with FEV₁ measured prechallenge and within 10 min postchallenge, (3) EVH and (4) methacholine BPT.

Results

Of 60 athletes (median age 17.5; range 16-28 years.; 40% females), 67% performed winter-sports, 43% reported asthma diagnosis. At least one positive BPT was observed in 68% (n=41/60), with rates of 51% (n=21/41) for standardised ECT, 49% (n=20/41) for unstandardised ECT, 32% (n=13/41) for EVH and methacholine BPT, while both standardised and unstandardised ECTs were simultaneously positive in only 20% (n=7/35). Standardised and unstandardised ECTs confirmed LAD with 54% sensitivity and 70% specificity, and 46% sensitivity and 68% specificity, respectively, using EVH as a reference, while EVH and methacholine BPT were both 33% sensitive and 85% specific, using standardised ECTs as reference.

Conclusion

App-based spirometry for unsupervised field-based ECTs may support the diagnostic process in athletes with LAD symptoms.

Trial registration number

NCT04275648.

Diagnostic approach to lower airway dysfunction in athletes: a systematic review and meta-analysis by a subgroup of the IOC consensus on 'acute respiratory illness in the athlete'

OBJECTIVES

To compare the performance of various diagnostic bronchoprovocation tests (BPT) in the assessment of lower airway dysfunction (LAD) in athletes and inform best clinical practice.

DESIGN

Systematic review with sensitivity and specificity meta-analyses.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EBSCOhost and Web of Science (1 January 1990-31 December 2021).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Original full-text studies, including athletes/physically active individuals (15-65 years) who underwent assessment for LAD by symptom-based questionnaires/history and/or direct and/or indirect BPTs.

RESULTS

In 26 studies containing data for quantitative meta-analyses on BPT diagnostic performance (n=2624 participants; 33% female); 22% had physician diagnosed asthma and 51% reported LAD symptoms. In athletes with symptoms of LAD, eucapnic voluntary hyperpnoea (EVH) and exercise challenge tests (ECTs) confirmed the diagnosis with a 46% sensitivity and 74% specificity, and 51% sensitivity and 84% specificity, respectively, while methacholine BPTs were 55% sensitive and 56% specific. If EVH was the reference standard, the presence of LAD symptoms was 78% sensitive and 45% specific for a positive EVH, while ECTs were 42% sensitive and 82% specific. If ECTs were the reference standard, the presence of LAD symptoms was 80% sensitive and 56% specific for a positive ECT, while EVH demonstrated 65% sensitivity and 65% specificity for a positive ECT.

CONCLUSION

In the assessment of LAD in athletes, EVH and field-based ECTs offer similar and moderate diagnostic test performance. In contrast, methacholine BPTs have lower overall test performance.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020170915.