PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Wilfried Nikolaizik
AU  - Jana Hahn
AU  - Monika Bauck
AU  - Stefanie Weber
TI  - Comparison of ciliary beat frequencies at different temperatures in young adults
AID  - 10.1183/23120541.00477-2020
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - ERJ Open Research
PG  - 00477-2020
4099  - http://openres.ersjournals.com/content/early/2020/09/01/23120541.00477-2020.short
4100  - http://openres.ersjournals.com/content/early/2020/09/01/23120541.00477-2020.full
AB  - Rationale Direct visualisation of ciliary beat pattern (CBP) and ciliary beat frequency (CBF) has been recommended as firstline diagnostic test in patients suspected of having primary ciliary dyskinesia (PCD). However, the test procedure is not yet completely standardised and centers measure the CBF at different temperatures.Objectives It was the aim of the study to compare CBF at different temperatures, to establish normative values, to check for age dependency and to measure the temperature on the nasal mucosa of the participants.Methods High-speed video-microscopy analysis with a SAVA system was used to determine CBP and CBF in the participants.Measurements Nasal brushings were taken and CBF was measured in randomised order at the three temperatures 25°C, 32°C and 37°C.Main Results 100 healthy young adults (74f, 26 m), aged 20,2–31,9 years, were included in the study. We found a highly significant difference among the groups, the median CBF was 7,0 Hz at 25°C, 7,6 Hz at 32°C and 8,0 Hz at 37°C. The maximum time period ex vivo was 65 min and did not differ significantly. However, CBF was significantly higher when the cilia were kept at a higher temperature before the measurements were made. We found no correlation between CBF and the age of the participants. The median nasal mucosal temperature in our study participants was 30,2°C (range 24,7–35,8) comparable to 30,2–34,4°C described in the literature.Conclusions The most appropriate temperature to measure CBF is 32°C. In our study the 95% confidence interval for this temperature was 6,3–9,0 Hz.FootnotesThis manuscript has recently been accepted for publication in the ERJ Open Research. It is published here in its accepted form prior to copyediting and typesetting by our production team. After these production processes are complete and the authors have approved the resulting proofs, the article will move to the latest issue of the ERJOR online. Please open or download the PDF to view this article.Conflict of interest: Dr. Nikolaizik has nothing to disclose.Conflict of interest: Dr. Hahn has nothing to disclose.Conflict of interest: Dr. Bauck has nothing to disclose.Conflict of interest: Prof. Dr. Weber has nothing to disclose.