|
Principal advantages and drawbacks of invasive and noninvasive methods |
||
| Method |
Pros |
cons |
|
|
||
| Invasive |
• sensitive and specific analysis of pulmonary mechanics |
• technically demanding (instrumentation of the trachea, technical equipment) |
| • based on physiological principles |
• need for anesthesia and tracheal instrumentation |
|
| • intact anatomical relationships in the lung |
• time-consuming |
|
| • bypassing of upper airway resistance, controlled ventilation, and local administration of aerosols via the tracheal tube |
• no repetitive measurements in tracheostomized animals |
|
| • ease of broncho-alveolar lavage samplings |
• expertise in handling |
|
| • repetitive and long-term measurements in orotracheally intubated mice |
||
| • applicable to the assessment of obstructive and restrictive* lung disorders (*requires additional hard- and software) |
||
| noninvasive |
• quick, easy-to-handle |
• no direct assessment of pulmonary mechanics |
| • repetitive and/or longitudinal measurements of airway responsiveness in the same animal |
• prone to artifacts (movements, temperature) |
|
| • normal breathing pattern with no need for anesthesia or tracheal instrumentation |
• contribution of upper airway resistance (changes of glottal aperture, nasal passages) |
|
| • uncertainty about the exact magnitude and localization of bronchoconstriction |
||
Glaab et al. Respiratory Research 2007 8:63 doi:10.1186/1465-9921-8-63 |
||