4.5 Article

Capsaicin cough sensitivity in smokers with and without airflow obstruction

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
卷 103, 期 5, 页码 786-790

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2008.11.010

关键词

Cough; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Cigarette smoking

资金

  1. French Societe de Pneumologie de Langue Francaise
  2. Chancellerie des Universites de Paris (legs Poix)
  3. Medical Research Council [G0400503B] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Cough is a frequent symptom of cigarette smokers that often precedes the development of airflow obstruction. We determined whether chronic cigarette smoking is associated with an increase in capsaicin cough response in the absence of cough. Methods: We examined this in asymptomatic smokers with normal lung function (n = 68, FEV1 99.3 +/- 2.1 % predicted) and in patients with established COPD without cough symptoms (n = 42; FEV1 57.0 +/- 2.6% predicted), using healthy non-smoking volunteers as control (n = 92; FEV1 100.6 +/- 1.7% predicted). Using an incremental capsaicin concentration challenge protocol, we recorded the concentrations that induced 2 (C2) and 5 or more coughs (C5). Results: Because females have a lower C2 and C5 than mates in the control group, we analysed the data in each group according to gender. Log C5 was decreased both in asymptomatic smokers (1.56 +/- 0.11 mu mol/L, p < 0.05) and in COPD patients (1.44 +/- 0.14 mu mol/L, p < 0.01) when compared to non-smokers (1.90 +/- 0.09 mu mol/L). Log C2 did not differ between groups. Log C2 and log C5 were decreased in women (0.772 +/- 0.071 mu mol/L and 1.481 +/- 0.094 mu mol/L, respectively) when compared to men (1.045 +/- 0.088 mu mol/L and 1.923 +/- 0.087 mu mol/L, respectively) (p < 0.05 for log C2; p < 0.001 for log C5). Conclusion: We conclude that chronic cigarette smoking increases capsaicin cough reflex and that this remains so with the development of COPD. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据