Breath analysis has long been recognized as a potentially attractive method for the diagnosis of several diseases. The main advantage over other diagnostic methods such as blood or urine analysis is that breath analysis is fully non-invasive, comfortable for patients and breath samples can be easily obtained. One possible future application of breath analysis may be the diagnosing and monitoring of diabetes. It is, therefore, essential, to firstly determine a relationship between exhaled biomarker concentration and glucose in blood as well as to compare the results with the results obtained from non-diabetic subjects. Concentrations of molecules which are biomarkers of diseases’ states, or early indicators of disease should be well documented, i.e., the variations of abnormal concentrations of breath biomarkers with age, gender and ethnic issues need to be verified. Furthermore, based on performed measurements it is rather obvious that analysis of exhaled acetone as a single biomarker of diabetes is unrealistic. In this paper, the author presents results of his research conducted on samples of breath gas from eleven healthy volunteers (HV) and fourteen type- 1 diabetic patients (T1DM) which were collected in 1-l SKC breath bags. The exhaled acetone concentration was measured using mass spectrometry (HPR-20 QIC, Hiden Analytical, Warrington, UK) coupled with a micropreconcentrator in LTCC (Low Temperature Cofired Ceramic). However, as according to recent studies the level of acetone varies to a significant extent for each blood glucose concentration of single individuals, a direct and absolute relationship between blood glucose and acetone has not been proved. Nevertheless, basing on the research results acetone in diabetic breath was found to be higher than 1.11 ppmv, while its average concentration in normal breath was lower than 0.83 ppmv.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited