Evaluation of a standardized collection device for exhaled breath sampling onto thermal desorption tubes
The Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA) sampler, marketed by Owlstone Medical, provides a step forward in exhaled breath sampling through active sampling directly onto thermal desorption (TD) tubes. Although an improvement to the issues surrounding breath bag sampling, the ReCIVA de...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of breath research 2020-07, Vol.14 (3), p.036004-036004 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 036004 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 036004 |
container_title | Journal of breath research |
container_volume | 14 |
creator | Harshman, Sean W Pitsch, Rhonda L Davidson, Christina N Lee, Erica M Scott, Alexander M Hill, Elizabeth M Mainali, Paras Brooks, Zachary E Strayer, Kraig E Schaeublin, Nicole M Wiens, Taylor L Brothers, Michael C Drummond, Leslie A Yamamoto, Dirk P Martin, Jennifer A |
description | The Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA) sampler, marketed by Owlstone Medical, provides a step forward in exhaled breath sampling through active sampling directly onto thermal desorption (TD) tubes. Although an improvement to the issues surrounding breath bag sampling, the ReCIVA device, first released in 2015, is a relatively new research and clinical tool that requires further exploration. Here, data are presented comparing two distinct ReCIVA devices. The results, comparing ReCIVA serial numbers #33 and #65, demonstrate that overall statistically insignificant results are obtained via targeted isoprene quantitation (p > 0.05). However, when the data are parsed by the TD tube type used to capture breath volatiles, either Tenax TA or the dual bed Tenax/Carbograph 5TD (5TD), a statistical difference (p < 0.05) among the two different TD tubes was present. These data, comparing the two ReCIVA devices with both Tenax TA and 5TD tubes, are further supported by a global metabolomics analysis yielding 85% of z-scores, comparing ReCIVA devices, below the limit for significance. Experiments to determine the effect of breathing rate on ReCIVA function, using guided breathing for low (7.5 breaths min−1) and high (15 breaths min−1) breathing rates, demonstrate the ReCIVA device shows no statistical difference among breathing rates for quantitated isoprene (p > 0.05). Global metabolomics analysis of the guided breathing rate data shows more than 87% of the z-scores, comparing high and low breathing rates using both the Tenax and the 5TD tubes, are below the level for significance. Finally, data are provided from a single participant who displayed background levels of isoprene while illustrating levels of acetone consistent with the remaining participants. Collectively, these data support the use of multiple ReCIVA devices for exhaled breath collection and provide evidence for an instance where exhaled isoprene is consistent with background levels. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1088/1752-7163/ab7e3b |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2733069157</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2376212289</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-d707f8245ba1317d75fdc479c56ac7a1edbbd42fe90b28fb137c24ac3892d40b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtLxTAQhYMovveuJODGhVfzaJt2KeILBDe6DpNk6q2kTU1aUX-9vV69guBqhpnvnIQzhBxwdspZWZ5xlYuZ4oU8A6NQmjWyvRqtr_o83yI7KT0zVmSsrDbJlhTTsOBym8wvX8GPMDSho6GmQNMAnYPomg901Abv0X4tHb42FmkdIsW3OfhpayLCMKcJ2t433RMN3RDoMMfYgp_4FGL_JR1Gg2mPbNTgE-5_113yeHX5cHEzu7u_vr04v5vZjBXDzCmm6lJkuQEuuXIqr53NVGXzAqwCjs4Yl4kaK2ZEWRsulRUZWFlWwmXMyF1yvPTtY3gZMQ26bZJF76HDMCYtpCoEF6KsJvToD_ocxthNv9NCScmKiudqotiSsjGkFLHWfWxaiO-aM724gl7ErBeR6-UVJsnht_FoWnQrwU_sE3CyBJrQ_z76r98nrhCSWg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2733069157</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of a standardized collection device for exhaled breath sampling onto thermal desorption tubes</title><source>IOP Publishing Journals</source><source>Institute of Physics (IOP) Journals - HEAL-Link</source><creator>Harshman, Sean W ; Pitsch, Rhonda L ; Davidson, Christina N ; Lee, Erica M ; Scott, Alexander M ; Hill, Elizabeth M ; Mainali, Paras ; Brooks, Zachary E ; Strayer, Kraig E ; Schaeublin, Nicole M ; Wiens, Taylor L ; Brothers, Michael C ; Drummond, Leslie A ; Yamamoto, Dirk P ; Martin, Jennifer A</creator><creatorcontrib>Harshman, Sean W ; Pitsch, Rhonda L ; Davidson, Christina N ; Lee, Erica M ; Scott, Alexander M ; Hill, Elizabeth M ; Mainali, Paras ; Brooks, Zachary E ; Strayer, Kraig E ; Schaeublin, Nicole M ; Wiens, Taylor L ; Brothers, Michael C ; Drummond, Leslie A ; Yamamoto, Dirk P ; Martin, Jennifer A</creatorcontrib><description>The Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA) sampler, marketed by Owlstone Medical, provides a step forward in exhaled breath sampling through active sampling directly onto thermal desorption (TD) tubes. Although an improvement to the issues surrounding breath bag sampling, the ReCIVA device, first released in 2015, is a relatively new research and clinical tool that requires further exploration. Here, data are presented comparing two distinct ReCIVA devices. The results, comparing ReCIVA serial numbers #33 and #65, demonstrate that overall statistically insignificant results are obtained via targeted isoprene quantitation (p > 0.05). However, when the data are parsed by the TD tube type used to capture breath volatiles, either Tenax TA or the dual bed Tenax/Carbograph 5TD (5TD), a statistical difference (p < 0.05) among the two different TD tubes was present. These data, comparing the two ReCIVA devices with both Tenax TA and 5TD tubes, are further supported by a global metabolomics analysis yielding 85% of z-scores, comparing ReCIVA devices, below the limit for significance. Experiments to determine the effect of breathing rate on ReCIVA function, using guided breathing for low (7.5 breaths min−1) and high (15 breaths min−1) breathing rates, demonstrate the ReCIVA device shows no statistical difference among breathing rates for quantitated isoprene (p > 0.05). Global metabolomics analysis of the guided breathing rate data shows more than 87% of the z-scores, comparing high and low breathing rates using both the Tenax and the 5TD tubes, are below the level for significance. Finally, data are provided from a single participant who displayed background levels of isoprene while illustrating levels of acetone consistent with the remaining participants. Collectively, these data support the use of multiple ReCIVA devices for exhaled breath collection and provide evidence for an instance where exhaled isoprene is consistent with background levels.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1752-7155</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1752-7163</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1088/1752-7163/ab7e3b</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32155613</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JBROBW</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: IOP Publishing</publisher><subject>Analysis (ReCIVA) ; exhaled breath ; GC-MS ; Respiration ; Respiration Collector for ; standardization ; Tenax TA ; Tenax/Carbograph 5TD ; thermal desorption</subject><ispartof>Journal of breath research, 2020-07, Vol.14 (3), p.036004-036004</ispartof><rights>Not subject to copyright in the USA. Contribution of UES Inc., Air Force Research Laboratory</rights><rights>Not subject to copyright in the USA. Contribution of UES Inc., Air Force Research Laboratory. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-d707f8245ba1317d75fdc479c56ac7a1edbbd42fe90b28fb137c24ac3892d40b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-d707f8245ba1317d75fdc479c56ac7a1edbbd42fe90b28fb137c24ac3892d40b3</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-8150-4320 ; 0000-0001-5517-3847</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1752-7163/ab7e3b/pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Giop$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,53846,53893</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32155613$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Harshman, Sean W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pitsch, Rhonda L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davidson, Christina N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Erica M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scott, Alexander M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hill, Elizabeth M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mainali, Paras</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brooks, Zachary E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strayer, Kraig E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaeublin, Nicole M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiens, Taylor L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brothers, Michael C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drummond, Leslie A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Dirk P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Jennifer A</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of a standardized collection device for exhaled breath sampling onto thermal desorption tubes</title><title>Journal of breath research</title><addtitle>JBR</addtitle><addtitle>J. Breath Res</addtitle><description>The Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA) sampler, marketed by Owlstone Medical, provides a step forward in exhaled breath sampling through active sampling directly onto thermal desorption (TD) tubes. Although an improvement to the issues surrounding breath bag sampling, the ReCIVA device, first released in 2015, is a relatively new research and clinical tool that requires further exploration. Here, data are presented comparing two distinct ReCIVA devices. The results, comparing ReCIVA serial numbers #33 and #65, demonstrate that overall statistically insignificant results are obtained via targeted isoprene quantitation (p > 0.05). However, when the data are parsed by the TD tube type used to capture breath volatiles, either Tenax TA or the dual bed Tenax/Carbograph 5TD (5TD), a statistical difference (p < 0.05) among the two different TD tubes was present. These data, comparing the two ReCIVA devices with both Tenax TA and 5TD tubes, are further supported by a global metabolomics analysis yielding 85% of z-scores, comparing ReCIVA devices, below the limit for significance. Experiments to determine the effect of breathing rate on ReCIVA function, using guided breathing for low (7.5 breaths min−1) and high (15 breaths min−1) breathing rates, demonstrate the ReCIVA device shows no statistical difference among breathing rates for quantitated isoprene (p > 0.05). Global metabolomics analysis of the guided breathing rate data shows more than 87% of the z-scores, comparing high and low breathing rates using both the Tenax and the 5TD tubes, are below the level for significance. Finally, data are provided from a single participant who displayed background levels of isoprene while illustrating levels of acetone consistent with the remaining participants. Collectively, these data support the use of multiple ReCIVA devices for exhaled breath collection and provide evidence for an instance where exhaled isoprene is consistent with background levels.</description><subject>Analysis (ReCIVA)</subject><subject>exhaled breath</subject><subject>GC-MS</subject><subject>Respiration</subject><subject>Respiration Collector for</subject><subject>standardization</subject><subject>Tenax TA</subject><subject>Tenax/Carbograph 5TD</subject><subject>thermal desorption</subject><issn>1752-7155</issn><issn>1752-7163</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>O3W</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUtLxTAQhYMovveuJODGhVfzaJt2KeILBDe6DpNk6q2kTU1aUX-9vV69guBqhpnvnIQzhBxwdspZWZ5xlYuZ4oU8A6NQmjWyvRqtr_o83yI7KT0zVmSsrDbJlhTTsOBym8wvX8GPMDSho6GmQNMAnYPomg901Abv0X4tHb42FmkdIsW3OfhpayLCMKcJ2t433RMN3RDoMMfYgp_4FGL_JR1Gg2mPbNTgE-5_113yeHX5cHEzu7u_vr04v5vZjBXDzCmm6lJkuQEuuXIqr53NVGXzAqwCjs4Yl4kaK2ZEWRsulRUZWFlWwmXMyF1yvPTtY3gZMQ26bZJF76HDMCYtpCoEF6KsJvToD_ocxthNv9NCScmKiudqotiSsjGkFLHWfWxaiO-aM724gl7ErBeR6-UVJsnht_FoWnQrwU_sE3CyBJrQ_z76r98nrhCSWg</recordid><startdate>20200701</startdate><enddate>20200701</enddate><creator>Harshman, Sean W</creator><creator>Pitsch, Rhonda L</creator><creator>Davidson, Christina N</creator><creator>Lee, Erica M</creator><creator>Scott, Alexander M</creator><creator>Hill, Elizabeth M</creator><creator>Mainali, Paras</creator><creator>Brooks, Zachary E</creator><creator>Strayer, Kraig E</creator><creator>Schaeublin, Nicole M</creator><creator>Wiens, Taylor L</creator><creator>Brothers, Michael C</creator><creator>Drummond, Leslie A</creator><creator>Yamamoto, Dirk P</creator><creator>Martin, Jennifer A</creator><general>IOP Publishing</general><scope>O3W</scope><scope>TSCCA</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8150-4320</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5517-3847</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200701</creationdate><title>Evaluation of a standardized collection device for exhaled breath sampling onto thermal desorption tubes</title><author>Harshman, Sean W ; Pitsch, Rhonda L ; Davidson, Christina N ; Lee, Erica M ; Scott, Alexander M ; Hill, Elizabeth M ; Mainali, Paras ; Brooks, Zachary E ; Strayer, Kraig E ; Schaeublin, Nicole M ; Wiens, Taylor L ; Brothers, Michael C ; Drummond, Leslie A ; Yamamoto, Dirk P ; Martin, Jennifer A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c406t-d707f8245ba1317d75fdc479c56ac7a1edbbd42fe90b28fb137c24ac3892d40b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Analysis (ReCIVA)</topic><topic>exhaled breath</topic><topic>GC-MS</topic><topic>Respiration</topic><topic>Respiration Collector for</topic><topic>standardization</topic><topic>Tenax TA</topic><topic>Tenax/Carbograph 5TD</topic><topic>thermal desorption</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Harshman, Sean W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pitsch, Rhonda L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Davidson, Christina N</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lee, Erica M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Scott, Alexander M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hill, Elizabeth M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mainali, Paras</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brooks, Zachary E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strayer, Kraig E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schaeublin, Nicole M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wiens, Taylor L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brothers, Michael C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Drummond, Leslie A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yamamoto, Dirk P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, Jennifer A</creatorcontrib><collection>Institute of Physics Open Access Journal Titles</collection><collection>IOPscience (Open Access)</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of breath research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Harshman, Sean W</au><au>Pitsch, Rhonda L</au><au>Davidson, Christina N</au><au>Lee, Erica M</au><au>Scott, Alexander M</au><au>Hill, Elizabeth M</au><au>Mainali, Paras</au><au>Brooks, Zachary E</au><au>Strayer, Kraig E</au><au>Schaeublin, Nicole M</au><au>Wiens, Taylor L</au><au>Brothers, Michael C</au><au>Drummond, Leslie A</au><au>Yamamoto, Dirk P</au><au>Martin, Jennifer A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of a standardized collection device for exhaled breath sampling onto thermal desorption tubes</atitle><jtitle>Journal of breath research</jtitle><stitle>JBR</stitle><addtitle>J. Breath Res</addtitle><date>2020-07-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>036004</spage><epage>036004</epage><pages>036004-036004</pages><issn>1752-7155</issn><eissn>1752-7163</eissn><coden>JBROBW</coden><abstract>The Respiration Collector for In Vitro Analysis (ReCIVA) sampler, marketed by Owlstone Medical, provides a step forward in exhaled breath sampling through active sampling directly onto thermal desorption (TD) tubes. Although an improvement to the issues surrounding breath bag sampling, the ReCIVA device, first released in 2015, is a relatively new research and clinical tool that requires further exploration. Here, data are presented comparing two distinct ReCIVA devices. The results, comparing ReCIVA serial numbers #33 and #65, demonstrate that overall statistically insignificant results are obtained via targeted isoprene quantitation (p > 0.05). However, when the data are parsed by the TD tube type used to capture breath volatiles, either Tenax TA or the dual bed Tenax/Carbograph 5TD (5TD), a statistical difference (p < 0.05) among the two different TD tubes was present. These data, comparing the two ReCIVA devices with both Tenax TA and 5TD tubes, are further supported by a global metabolomics analysis yielding 85% of z-scores, comparing ReCIVA devices, below the limit for significance. Experiments to determine the effect of breathing rate on ReCIVA function, using guided breathing for low (7.5 breaths min−1) and high (15 breaths min−1) breathing rates, demonstrate the ReCIVA device shows no statistical difference among breathing rates for quantitated isoprene (p > 0.05). Global metabolomics analysis of the guided breathing rate data shows more than 87% of the z-scores, comparing high and low breathing rates using both the Tenax and the 5TD tubes, are below the level for significance. Finally, data are provided from a single participant who displayed background levels of isoprene while illustrating levels of acetone consistent with the remaining participants. Collectively, these data support the use of multiple ReCIVA devices for exhaled breath collection and provide evidence for an instance where exhaled isoprene is consistent with background levels.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>IOP Publishing</pub><pmid>32155613</pmid><doi>10.1088/1752-7163/ab7e3b</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8150-4320</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5517-3847</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1752-7155 |
ispartof | Journal of breath research, 2020-07, Vol.14 (3), p.036004-036004 |
issn | 1752-7155 1752-7163 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2733069157 |
source | IOP Publishing Journals; Institute of Physics (IOP) Journals - HEAL-Link |
subjects | Analysis (ReCIVA) exhaled breath GC-MS Respiration Respiration Collector for standardization Tenax TA Tenax/Carbograph 5TD thermal desorption |
title | Evaluation of a standardized collection device for exhaled breath sampling onto thermal desorption tubes |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-22T10%3A08%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20a%20standardized%20collection%20device%20for%20exhaled%20breath%20sampling%20onto%20thermal%20desorption%20tubes&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20breath%20research&rft.au=Harshman,%20Sean%20W&rft.date=2020-07-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=036004&rft.epage=036004&rft.pages=036004-036004&rft.issn=1752-7155&rft.eissn=1752-7163&rft.coden=JBROBW&rft_id=info:doi/10.1088/1752-7163/ab7e3b&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2376212289%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2733069157&rft_id=info:pmid/32155613&rfr_iscdi=true |