Sweat conductivity: an accurate diagnostic test for cystic fibrosis?

BACKGROUND Sweat chloride test is the gold standard test for cystic fibrosis (CF) diagnosis. Sweat conductivity is widely used although still considered a screening test. METHODS This was a prospective, cross-sectional, diagnostic research conducted at the laboratory of the Instituto da Criança of the Hospital das Clínicas, São Paulo, Brazil. Sweat chloride (quantitative pilocarpine iontophoresis) and sweat conductivity tests were simultaneously performed in patients referred for a sweat test between March 2007 and October 2008. Conductivity and chloride cut-off values used to rule out or diagnose CF were <75 and ≥90 mmol/L and <60 and ≥60 mmol/L, respectively. The ROC curve method was used to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV), as well as the respective 95% confidence intervals and to calculate the area under the curve for both tests. The kappa coefficient was used to evaluate agreement between the tests. RESULTS Both tests were performed in 738 children, and CF was ruled out in 714 subjects; the median sweat chloride and conductivity values were 11 and 25 mmol/L in these populations, respectively. Twenty-four patients who had received a diagnosis of CF presented median sweat chloride and conductivity values of 87 and 103 mmol/L, respectively. Conductivity values above 90 mmol/L had 83.3% sensitivity, 99.7% specificity, 90.9% PPV and 99.4% NPV to diagnose CF. The best conductivity cut-off value to exclude CF was <75 mmol/L. Good agreement was observed between the tests (kappa: 0.934). CONCLUSIONS The sweat conductivity test yielded a high degree of diagnostic accuracy and it showed good agreement with sweat chloride. We suggest that it should play a role as a diagnostic test for CF in the near future.

[1]  C. Riedi,et al.  [Comparison of conductivity with sodium determination in the same sweat sample] , 2000, Jornal de pediatria.

[2]  A Borruso,et al.  Reliability of sweat‐testing by the Macroduct® collection method combined with conductivity analysis in comparison with the classic Gibson and Cooke technique , 2000, Acta paediatrica.

[3]  G. Mastella Sweat testing: can the conductivity analysis take the place of the classic Gibson and Cooke technique? , 2010, Jornal de pediatria.

[4]  D. Sackett,et al.  The architecture of diagnostic research , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[5]  C. Leone,et al.  Comparison between classic Gibson and Cooke technique and sweat conductivity test in patients with and without cystic fibrosis. , 2010, Jornal de pediatria.

[6]  J. Yankaskas,et al.  Diagnostic sweat testing: the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation guidelines. , 2007, The Journal of pediatrics.

[7]  M. Leigh Diagnosis of CF despite normal or borderline sweat chloride. , 2004, Paediatric respiratory reviews.

[8]  Vicky A Legrys,et al.  Guidelines for diagnosis of cystic fibrosis in newborns through older adults: Cystic Fibrosis Foundation consensus report. , 2008, The Journal of pediatrics.

[9]  A. Nowakowska,et al.  Bilateral sweat tests with two different methods as a part of cystic fibrosis newborn screening (CF NBS) protocol and additional quality control. , 2010, Folia histochemica et cytobiologica.

[10]  L. Lands,et al.  Sweat‐testing: A review of current technical requirements , 2005, Pediatric pulmonology.

[11]  H. Shwachman,et al.  Electrical conductivity of sweat: a simple diagnostic test in children. , 1963, Pediatrics.

[12]  Roland A. Ammann,et al.  Nanoduct® sweat testing for rapid diagnosis in newborns, infants and children with cystic fibrosis , 2008, European Journal of Pediatrics.

[13]  K B Hammond,et al.  Clinical evaluation of the macroduct sweat collection system and conductivity analyzer in the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis. , 1994, The Journal of pediatrics.

[14]  A. Stenbit,et al.  Making the Diagnosis of Cystic Fibrosis , 2008, The American journal of the medical sciences.

[15]  G. Cutting,et al.  The diagnosis of cystic fibrosis: a consensus statement. Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Consensus Panel. , 1998, The Journal of pediatrics.

[16]  T. Laguna,et al.  Comparison of quantitative sweat chloride methods after positive newborn screen for cystic fibrosis , 2012, Pediatric pulmonology.

[17]  Fabíola Villac Adde,et al.  Comparação entre o método clássico de Gibson e Cooke e o teste da condutividade no suor em pacientes com e sem fibrose cística , 2010 .

[18]  R B Haynes,et al.  Evidence base of clinical diagnosis: The architecture of diagnostic research , 2002 .

[19]  A. Green,et al.  Guidelines for the performance of the sweat test for the diagnosis of cystic fibrosis , 2007, Annals of clinical biochemistry.

[20]  R E COOKE,et al.  A test for concentration of electrolytes in sweat in cystic fibrosis of the pancreas utilizing pilocarpine by iontophoresis. , 1959, Pediatrics.

[21]  Mario H Vargas,et al.  Sweat conductivity and chloride titration for cystic fibrosis diagnosis in 3834 subjects. , 2003, Journal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society.

[22]  A BLOXSOM The Electrical Conductivity of Electrolytes Found in the Sweat of Patients with Fibrocystic Disease of the Pancreas , 1959, Archives of disease in childhood.

[23]  B. Rosenstein,et al.  What is a cystic fibrosis diagnosis? , 1998, Clinics in chest medicine.

[24]  S. Raskin,et al.  Incidence of cystic fibrosis in five different states of Brazil as determined by screening of p.F508del, mutation at the CFTR gene in newborns and patients. , 2008, Journal of cystic fibrosis : official journal of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society.

[25]  D. Woolf,et al.  Indirect measurements of sweat electrolyte concentration in the laboratory diagnosis of cystic fibrosis , 2000, Archives of disease in childhood.