Simple breath test might diagnose heart failure
An experimental breath test, designed to quickly identify patients suffering from heart failure simply by analyzing the contents of a single exhaled breath, has demonstrated promise in early trials, a team of researchers said.
The investigators stressed that their evaluation is based on a small group of participating patients, and that more extensive research will have to be done to confirm their initial success.
But by subjecting a patient's breath to a rigorous but fast analysis of the hundreds of volatile organic compounds contained therein, the study team said it has so far been able to correctly diagnose heart failure among newly hospitalized patients with 100 percent accuracy.
“Every individual has a breath print that differentiates them from other people, depending on what's going on in their body,” explained Dr. Raed Dweik, the study lead author and a staff physician in the department of pulmonary, allergy and critical care medicine with the Respiratory Institute at Cleveland Clinic. “And that print can tell us a lot about a person, what they've been exposed to and what disease they have.
“That's what makes the new field of breath testing so promising, because it is nonintrusive, so there is no risk involved,” Dweik said. “And you can do it anywhere — in a clinic, in a hospital, anywhere.”
The findings were published March 25 in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
The study authors pointed out that the most common reason American patients are admitted to a hospital is when there is a suspicion of heart failure — a tough-to-treat condition in which the heart's pumping action grows gradually weaker over time.
Now a diagnosis of heart failure comes from a variety of factors, according to the U.S. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. These include medical history and symptoms, and a physical exam in which a doctor will listen to a patient's heart and lung sounds as well as check ankles, feet, legs and abdomen for signs of fluid buildup. Blood tests and an electrocardiogram can help confirm that heart failure exists.
Dr. Gregg Fonarow, a professor of cardiology at the University of California at Los Angeles, said that if research were able to establish its effectiveness, a breath-driven tool for identifying heart failure would be a helpful diagnostic innovation — but more so in a doctor's office or clinic than in the hospital.
“If it is clear that it is highly reliable and specific and sensitive, then yes, it would be a welcome advance,” Fonarow said. “But I would say it would be perhaps more helpful for primary care physicians in an outpatient setting, because that is where it's most challenging to identify heart failure.
“Today a diagnosis in that environment is based on a patient's history and exam, but symptoms for heart failure can easily overlap with a lot of other diagnoses. And the blood work that would be taken in a doctor's office might not come back until the next day, delaying identification,” he noted.
“So a breath test would be most useful in that kind of challenging situation,” Fonarow added. “But in an emergency room, while there are challenges as well, bedside blood tests are much more readily drawn and quickly analyzed so you can often get the results in minutes. So there may be potentially less of a role for a breath test in that kind of setting.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Hillary Clinton kept in touch with key donors, emails show
- Top general in Afghanistan: U.S. strike on hospital a mistake
- Despite sunny forecast, South Carolina ordeal far from over
- Allies reach Pacific Rim trade deal likely to divide political parties
- Benghazi transcript on way, defying GOP leaders on committee
- Federal watchdog renews investigation of Secret Service leak
- Study finds potential problem in heart valve implants
- Coast Guard believes El Faro container ship sank
- Publisher apologizes for textbook calling slaves ‘workers’
- House Speaker Boehner sets vote on his replacement
- Feds, states announce $20B agreement with BP on deadly gulf oil spill