A Comparison of Nasal Resistance in White Caucasians and Blacks

Canbay, Ercan; Bhatia, Suren

doi:10.2500/105065897781446801

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, our normal value is higher than other reported values probably because the nasal resistance was measured in the untreated state. 6,7 2 Cole reported a mean total nasal resistance of 0.33 Pa/cm 3 /s for 800 asymptomatic adults at a transnasal pressure of 150 Pascals. 3 Shelton and Eiser found that in the untreated noses of normal subjects the mean total resistance was 0.31 (ranged from 0.13 to 0.84) Pa/ cm 3 /s at a reference pressure of 75 Pascals and mean unilateral resistance was 0.65 (ranged from 0.25 to 2.4) Pa/cm 3 /s at a reference pressure of 150 Pascals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active anterior rhinomanometry analysis in normal adult Malays

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The differences in facial anatomical structures of the major ethnic groups, may also be reflected in nasal resistance. Active anterior rhinomanometry (AAR) is the recommended technique for the objective assessment of nasal airway resistance (NAR). This study comprised of 85 adult Malay subjects. All the subjects had to undergo a primary assessment of relevant symptoms of nasal disease and nasal examination before undergoing AAR assessment. The mean value of total nasal airway resistance (NAR) was 0.19 Pa/cm(3)/s (ranged from 0.09 to 0.55 Pa/cm(3)/s) at 75 Pa pressure point and 0.24 Pa/cm(3)/s (ranged from 0.12 to 0.52 Pa/cm(3)/s) at 150 Pa pressure point. The mean unilateral NAR was 0.46 Pa/cm(3)/s at a reference pressure of 75 Pa and 0.51 Pa/cm(3)/s at a reference pressure of 150 Pa. In this study we presented normal values for NAR in healthy Malay adult subjects. AAR proves to be a valuable clinical method for recording and quantitating nasal resistance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active anterior rhinomanometry analysis in normal adult Malays

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast to the above studies, Canbay and Bhatia (57) used rhinomanometry to compared nasal resistance in 42 Caucasians and 32 African Americans; not only that their study found lower mean nasal resistance in African Americans than Caucasians, the differences in values were reported to be statistically significant. Zhu et al (58) used CFD methodology to compare airflow pattern among three subjects from different ethnic descents (Caucasian, Chinese, and Indian), and they concluded that airflow behavior in the main nasal cavity was different between the Caucasian male subject and the Indian male subject.…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

A Computational Study of Nasal Spray Deposition Pattern in Four Ethnic Groups

Keeler

Patki

Woodard

et al. 2016

Journal of Aerosol Medicine and Pulmonary Drug Delivery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Very little is known about the role of nasal morphology due to ethnic variation on particle deposition pattern in the sinonasal cavity. This preliminary study utilizes computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling to investigate sinonasal airway morphology and deposition patterns of intranasal sprayed particles in the nose and sinuses of individuals from four different ethnic groups: African American (Black); Asian; Caucasian; and Latin American. Methods: Sixteen subjects (four from each ethnic group) with ''normal'' sinus protocol computed tomography (CT) were selected for CFD analysis. Three-dimensional reconstruction of each subject's sinonasal cavity was created from their personal CT images. CFD simulations were carried out in ANSYS Fluent TM in two phases: airflow phase was done by numerically solving the Navier-Stokes equations for steady state laminar inhalation; and particle dispersed phase was solved by tracking injected (sprayed) particles through the calculated airflow field. A total of 10,000 particle streams were released from each nostril, 1000 particles per diameter ranging from 5 lm to 50 lm, with size increments of 5 lm. Results: As reported in the literature, Caucasians (5.31 -0.42 cm

show abstract

“…In rhinomanometry, there are published normal ranges of nasal airway resistance for anterior and posterior rhinomanometry [1,23,24]. Some information on the effects of ethnicity on nasal patency is also available [15,25].…”

Section: Normal Valuesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Nasal congestion and airway obstruction: the validity of available objective and subjective measures

Schumacher

2002

Curr Allergy Asthma Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rhinomanometry and acoustic rhinometry provide the best methods for objective assessment of nasal obstruction. Advanced equipment for these methods is now available, and most devices are reliable provided that care is taken to calibrate the device properly and, for rhinomanometers, the user is completely familiar with the mathematical algorithm for resistance used by the accompanying software. Suggestions for improvement in standardization of rhinomanometry are given. Rhinomanometry and rhinometry are both capable of objectively measuring nasal obstruction, but they are complementary methods that assess different nasal attributes, the former being a test of nasal function, and the latter a representation of nasal geometry. Objective methods are strongly recommended for use in the evaluation of pharmacologic agents that are expected to improve nasal airflow. When further studies needed to validate their use for long-term comparisons are done, these methods should find an increasing place in clinical practice.

show abstract

A Comparison of Nasal Resistance in White Caucasians and Blacks

Cited by 23 publications

References 9 publications

Active anterior rhinomanometry analysis in normal adult Malays

Active anterior rhinomanometry analysis in normal adult Malays

A Computational Study of Nasal Spray Deposition Pattern in Four Ethnic Groups

Nasal congestion and airway obstruction: the validity of available objective and subjective measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About