Bronchial hyperresponsiveness testing in athletes of the Swiss Paralympic team

Asthma and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in athletes: Diagnosis, treatment, and anti-doping challenges

Athletes often experience lower airway dysfunction, such as asthma and exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB), which affects more than half the athletes in some sports, not least in endurance sports. Symptoms include coughing, wheezing, and breathlessness, alongside airway narrowing, hyperresponsiveness, and inflammation. Early diagnosis and management are essential. Not only because untreated or poorly managed asthma and EIB potentially affects competition performance and training, but also because untreated airway inflammation can result in airway epithelial damage, remodeling, and fibrosis. Asthma and EIB do not hinder performance, as advancements in treatment strategies have made it possible for affected athletes to compete at the highest level. However, practitioners and athletes must ensure that the treatment complies with general guidelines and anti-doping regulations to prevent the risk of a doping sanction because of inadvertently exceeding specified dosing limits. In this review, we describe considerations and challenges in diagnosing and managing athletes with asthma and EIB. We also discuss challenges facing athletes with asthma and EIB, while also being subject to anti-doping regulations.

Asthma, atopy, and exercise: Sex differences in exercise-induced bronchoconstriction

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory lung disease affecting approximately 7.7% of the US population. Sex differences in the prevalence, incidence, and severity of asthma have been widely described throughout the lifespan, showing higher rates in boys than girls before puberty, but a reversed pattern in adults. Asthma is often associated with atopy, i.e. the tendency to develop allergic diseases, and can be worsened by environmental stimuli and/or exercise. While not exclusive to patients with asthma, exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is a common complication of athletes and individuals who exercise regularly. Currently, there is limited research on sex differences in EIB and its relationship with atopy and asthma in men and women. In this minireview, we summarize the available literature on this topic. Overall, the collective knowledge supports the notion that physiological changes triggered during exercise affect males and females differently, suggesting an interaction among sex, exercise, sex hormones, and atopic status in the course of EIB pathophysiology. Understanding these differences is important to provide personalized management plans to men and women who exercise regularly and suffer from underlying asthma and/or atopy.

Sex Differences in Exercise-Induced Bronchoconstriction in Athletes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is a common complication of athletes and individuals who exercise regularly. It is estimated that about 90% of patients with underlying asthma (a sexually dimorphic disease) experience EIB; however, sex differences in EIB have not been studied extensively. With the goal of better understanding the prevalence of EIB in males and females, and because atopy has been reported to occur at higher rates in athletes, in this study, we investigated sex differences in EIB and atopy in athletes. A systematic literature review identified 60 studies evaluating EIB and/or atopy in post-pubertal adult athletes (n = 7501). Collectively, these studies reported: (1) a 23% prevalence of EIB in athletes; (2) a higher prevalence of atopy in male vs. female athletes; (3) a higher prevalence of atopy in athletes with EIB; (4) a significantly higher rate of atopic EIB in male vs. female athletes. Our analysis indicates that the physiological changes that occur during exercise may differentially affect male and female athletes, and suggest an interaction between male sex, exercise, and atopic status in the course of EIB. Understanding these sex differences is important to provide personalized management plans to athletes with underlying asthma and/or atopy.

Eucapnic Voluntary Hyperpnea: Gold Standard for Diagnosing Exercise-Induced Bronchoconstriction in Athletes?

In athletes, a secure diagnos is of exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (EIB) is dependent on objective testing. Evaluating spirometric indices of airflow before and following an exercise bout is intuitively the optimal means for the diagnosis; however, this approach is recognized as having several key limitations. Accordingly, alternative indirect bronchoprovocation tests have been recommended as surrogate means for obtaining a diagnosis of EIB. Of these tests, it is often argued that the eucapnic voluntary hyperpnea (EVH) challenge represents the ‘gold standard’. This article provides a state-of-the-art review of EVH, including an overview of the test methodology and its interpretation. We also address the performance of EVH against the other functional and clinical approaches commonly adopted for the diagnosis of EIB. The published evidence supports a key role for EVH in the diagnostic algorithm for EIB testing in athletes. However, its wide sensitivity and specificity and poor repeatability preclude EVH from being termed a ‘gold standard’ test for EIB.

Bronchoprovocation tests in asthma: direct versus indirect challenges

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review describes different bronchoprovocation tests and their merits in diagnosing asthma.

RECENT FINDINGS

A new indirect challenge test using dry powder mannitol has been made available and has been systematically validated and tested in different populations.

SUMMARY

Airway hyperresponsiveness (AHR) is a characteristic feature of asthma, and its measurement using direct inhalation challenges, particularly with inhaled methacholine or histamine, or indirect challenges using stimuli such as exercise, dry air hyperpnea, distilled water, hypertonic saline and mannitol, and the pharmacological agent adenosine monophosphate is important in establishing a correct diagnosis. Direct challenge tests are sensitive and have a high negative predictive value to exclude asthma. This is particularly true in excluding asthma as a diagnosis in patients with symptoms that suggest asthma, but are caused by another condition. Indirect AHR correlates better with eosinophilic airway inflammation. Therefore, indirect challenge tests are seen as more specific. A newer indirect challenge test that uses a kit containing prepacked capsules of dry powder mannitol in different doses is safe and efficient to use. Indirect challenge tests are superior to direct challenge tests to confirm the presence of asthma.