Repeatability and validity of cell and fluid-phase measurements in nasal fluid: a comparison of two methods of nasal lavage

• Published in: Clinical and experimental allergy 2001-07, Vol.31 (7), p.1111-1115
• Main Authors: Belda, J., Parameswaran, K., Keith, P. K., Hargreave, F. E.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Biological and medical sciences; Blood Proteins - metabolism; Cell Count - methods; cell counts; ECP; eosinophil cationic protein; Eosinophil Granule Proteins; Female; Humans; Immunological methods for diagnosis and exploration; Immunopathology; Leukocyte Count - methods; Male; Medical sciences; Nasal Cavity - chemistry; Nasal Cavity - cytology; nasal lavage; Nasal Lavage Fluid - chemistry; Nasal Lavage Fluid - cytology; Other methods; reproducibility; Reproducibility of Results; Ribonucleases; Therapeutic Irrigation - methods; validity
• ISSN: 0954-7894; 1365-2222
• DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2222.2001.01133.x

Background There is little information on the repeatability of cell counts and fluid‐phase measurements in nasal fluid obtained by different methods of nasal lavage. Objective To compare the repeatability and validity of total and differential cell counts and eosinophil cationic protein (ECP) in nasal secretions obtained by two methods of nasal lavage. Patients and methods Twelve healthy subjects and twelve subjects with clinically stable allergic rhinitis were randomly assigned to two nasal lavages (separated by 48 h), by one of two methods in the first week and by the second method in the following week. One method was a modification of the method described by Greiff et al. and Grunberg and coworkers and the other was that described by Naclerio and coworkers. Results Both methods of nasal lavage gave poorly repeatable eosinophil counts and ECP in normal subjects but better repeatability in subjects with rhinitis. The modified Greiff/Grunberg method gave higher and more repeatable total cell count and, in subjects with rhinitis, more reproducible ECP levels compared with the Naclerio method. Both methods were able to discriminate between healthy and rhinitic subjects: mean ± SD eosinophil percentage count and eosinophil cationic protein differences were 4.5 ± 4% (P