Login to your account

Username *
Password *
Remember Me

Blog With Right Sidebar

Combination formoterol and budesonide as maintenance and reliever therapy versus combination inhaler maintenance for chronic asthma in adults and children.

Related Articles

Combination formoterol and budesonide as maintenance and reliever therapy versus combination inhaler maintenance for chronic asthma in adults and children.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 16;12:CD009019

Authors: Kew KM, Karner C, Mindus SM, Ferrara G

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asthma is characterised by chronic inflammation of the airways and recurrent exacerbations with wheezing, chest tightness and cough. Treatment with inhaled steroids and bronchodilators often results in good control of symptoms, prevention of further morbidity and mortality and improved quality of life. Several steroids and beta2-agonists (long- and short-acting) as well as combinations of these treatments are available in a single inhaler to be used once or twice a day, with a separate inhaler for relief of symptoms when needed (for patients in Step three or higher, according to Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA) guidelines). Budesonide/formoterol is also licenced for use as maintenance and reliever therapy from a single inhaler (SiT; sometimes referred to as SMART therapy). SiT can be prescribed at a lower dose than other combination therapy because of the additional steroid doses being received as reliever therapy. It has been suggested that using SiT improves compliance and hence reduces symptoms and exacerbations, but it is unclear whether it increases side effects associated with the use of inhaled steroids.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of budesonide/formoterol in a single inhaler (SiT) to be used for both maintenance and reliever therapy in asthma in comparison with maintenance treatment provided through combination inhalers with a higher maintenance steroid dose (either fluticasone/salmeterol or budesonide/formoterol), along with additional fast-acting beta2-agonists for relief of symptoms.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials, online trial registries and drug company websites. The most recent search was conducted in February 2013.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included parallel-group, randomised controlled trials of at least 12 weeks' duration. Studies were included if they compared single-inhaler therapy with budesonide/formoterol (SiT) versus combination inhalers at a higher maintenance dose of steroids than was given in the SiT arm (either salmeterol/fluticasone or budesonide/formoterol).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Primary outcomes were exacerbations requiring hospitalisation, exacerbations requiring oral corticosteroids and serious adverse events (including mortality).
MAIN RESULTS: Four studies randomly assigning 9130 people with asthma were included; two were six-month double-blind studies, and two were 12-month open-label studies. No trials included children younger than age 12. Trials included more women than men, with mean age ranging from 38 to 45, and mean baseline steroid dose (inhaled beclomethasone (BDP) equivalent) from 636 to 888 μg. Mean baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) percentage predicted was between 70% and 73% in three of the trials, and 96% in another. All studies were funded by AstraZeneca and were generally free from methodological biases, although the two open-label studies were rated as having high risk for blinding, and some evidence of selective outcome reporting was found. These possible sources of bias did not lead us to downgrade the quality of the evidence. The quantity of inhaled steroids, including puffs taken for relief from symptoms, was consistently lower for SiT than for the comparison groups.Separate data for exacerbations leading to hospitalisations, to emergency room (ER) visits or to a course of oral steroids could not be obtained. Compared with higher fixed-dose combination inhalers, fewer people using SiT had exacerbations requiring hospitalisation or a visit to the ER (odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.90; I(2) = 0%, P = 0.66), and fewer had exacerbations requiring a course of oral corticosteroids (OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87; I(2) = 0%, P = 0.82). This translates to one less person admitted to hospital or visiting the ER (95% CI 0 to 2 fewer) and two fewer people needing oral steroids (95% CI 1 to 3 fewer) compared with fixed-dose combination treatment with a short-acting beta-agonist (SABA) reliever (per 100 treated over eight months). No statistical heterogeneity was observed in either outcome, and the evidence was rated of high quality. Although issues with blinding were evident in two of the studies, and one study recruited a less severe population, sensitivity analyses did not change the main results, so quality was not downgraded.We could not rule out the possibility that SiT increased rates of serious adverse events (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13; I(2) = 0%, P = 0.98; moderate-quality evidence, downgraded owing to imprecision).We were unable to say whether SiT improved results for several secondary outcomes (morning and evening peak expiratory flow (PEF), rescue medication use, symptoms scales), and in cases where results were significant, the effect sizes were not considered clinically meaningful (predose FEV1, nocturnal awakenings and quality of life).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: SiT reduces the number of people having asthma exacerbations requiring oral steroids and the number requiring hospitalisation or an ER visit compared with fixed-dose combination inhalers. Evidence for serious adverse events was unclear. The mean daily dose of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in SiT, including the total dose administered with reliever use, was always lower than that of the other combination groups. This suggests that the flexibility in steroid administration that is possible with SiT might be more effective than a standard fixed-dose combination by increasing the dose only when needed and keeping it low during stable stages of the disease. Data for hospitalisations alone could not be obtained, and no studies have yet addressed this question in children younger than age 12.

PMID: 24343671 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Effect of Inhaled MgSO4 on FEV1 and PEF in Children with Asthma Induced by Acetylcholine: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trail of 330 Cases.

Related Articles

Effect of Inhaled MgSO4 on FEV1 and PEF in Children with Asthma Induced by Acetylcholine: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trail of 330 Cases.

J Trop Pediatr. 2013 Dec 16;

Authors: Sun YX, Gong CH, Liu S, Yuan XP, Yin LJ, Yan L, Shi TT, Dai JH

Abstract
Objectives: To determine the response of nebulized magnesium sulfate on the lung function of acetylcholine-induced asthma children.Methods: Three hundred and thirty children of asthma with positive bronchial provocation test were randomly divided into three groups: magnesium sulfate, albuterol, and a combination of magnesium sulfate and albuterol. Lung function was compared between the three groups.Results: Forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and peak expiratory flow (PEF) as percentage over predicted at 10 min and 20 min in albuterol and combination group were significantly improved when compared to magnesium group. The changes in FEV1 and PEF expressed as absolute and percentage over predicted was not statistically significant from baseline to 20 min in magnesium, albuterol, and combination of magnesium sulfate and albuterol. There was no significant adverse effect observed during the present study.Conclusion: Nebulized magnesium sulfate alone has a bronchodilatory effect in Ach-induced asthmatic children. The combination of MgSO4 and albuterol did not has a synergistic effect.Key words: magnesium sulfate, nebulization, asthma, children, lung function.

PMID: 24343824 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

The complexity of managing COPD exacerbations: a grounded theory study of European general practice.

Related Articles

The complexity of managing COPD exacerbations: a grounded theory study of European general practice.

BMJ Open. 2013;3(12):e003861

Authors: Risør MB, Spigt M, Iversen R, Godycki-Cwirko M, Francis N, Altiner A, Andreeva E, Kung K, Melbye H

Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To understand the concerns and challenges faced by general practitioners (GPs) and respiratory physicians about primary care management of acute exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
DESIGN: 21 focus group discussions (FGDs) were performed in seven countries with a Grounded Theory approach. Each country performed three rounds of FGDs.
SETTING: Primary and secondary care in Norway, Germany, Wales, Poland, Russia, The Netherlands, China (Hong Kong).
PARTICIPANTS: 142 GPs and respiratory physicians were chosen to include urban and rural GPs as well as hospital-based and out patient-clinic respiratory physicians.
RESULTS: Management of acute COPD exacerbations is dealt with within a scope of concerns. These concerns range from 'dealing with comorbidity' through 'having difficult patients' to 'confronting a hopeless disease'. The first concern displays medical uncertainty regarding diagnosis, medication and hospitalisation. These clinical processes become blurred by comorbidity and the social context of the patient. The second concern shows how patients receive the label 'difficult' exactly because they need complex attention, but even more because they are time consuming, do not take responsibility and are non-compliant. The third concern relates to the emotional reactions by the physicians when confronted with 'a hopeless disease' due to the fact that most of the patients do not improve and the treatment slows down the process at best. GPs and respiratory physicians balance these concerns with medical knowledge and practical, situational knowledge, trying to encompass the complexity of a medical condition.
CONCLUSIONS: Knowing the patient is essential when dealing with comorbidities as well as with difficult relations in the consultations on exacerbations. This study suggests that it is crucial to improve the collaboration between primary and secondary care, in terms of, for example, shared consultations and defined work tasks, which may enhance shared knowledge of patients, medical decision-making and improved management planning.

PMID: 24319274 [PubMed]

"Causes of death in asthma, COPD and non-respiratory hospitalized patients: a multicentric study"

Related Articles

"Causes of death in asthma, COPD and non-respiratory hospitalized patients: a multicentric study"

BMC Pulm Med. 2013 Dec 10;13(1):73

Authors: Soto-Campos JG, Plaza V, Soriano JB, Cabrera-López C, Almonacid-Sánchez C, Vazquezoliva RM, Serrano J, Ballaz-Quincoces A, Galo AP, Santos V

Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is limited information on the causes of death in asthma patients.Objectives: To determine the causes of death in hospitalized asthmatic patients and to compare with those observed in COPD patients and non-respiratory individuals, with a particular interest in associations with previous cardiovascular disease.
METHODS: Retrospective case-control study which analyzed the deaths of all hospitalized patients admitted for any reason during January, April, July and October of 2008 in 13 Spanish centers. Medical records of deceased patients were reviewed, and demographic and clinical data were collected.
RESULTS: A total of 2,826 deaths (mean age 75 years, 56% men) were included in the analysis, of which 82 (2.9%) were of patients with asthma and 283 (10%) with COPD.The most common causes of death in asthma patients were cardiovascular diseases (29.3%), malignancies (20.7%) and infections (14.6%); in COPD patients they were malignancies (26.5%), acute respiratory failure (25.8%) and cardiovascular diseases (21.6%). Asthma, compared to COPD patients, died significantly less frequently from acute respiratory failure and lung cancer. A multivariate logistic regression analysis failed to associate asthma with cardiovascular deaths.
CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular disease is the most frequent cause of death among hospitalized asthma patients. The specific causes of death differ between asthma and COPD patients.

PMID: 24321217 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure.

Related Articles

Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation as a weaning strategy for intubated adults with respiratory failure.

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 9;12:CD004127

Authors: Burns KE, Meade MO, Premji A, Adhikari NK

Abstract
BACKGROUND: Noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) provides ventilatory support without the need for an invasive airway. Interest has emerged in using NPPV to facilitate earlier removal of an endotracheal tube and to decrease complications associated with prolonged intubation.
OBJECTIVES: We evaluated studies in which invasively ventilated adults with respiratory failure of any cause (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), non-COPD, postoperative, nonoperative) were weaned by means of early extubation followed by immediate application of NPPV or continued IPPV weaning. The primary objective was to determine whether the noninvasive positive-pressure ventilation (NPPV) strategy reduced all-cause mortality compared with invasive positive-pressure ventilation (IPPV) weaning. Secondary objectives were to ascertain differences between strategies in proportions of weaning failure and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital length of stay (LOS), total duration of mechanical ventilation, duration of mechanical support related to weaning, duration of endotracheal mechanical ventilation (ETMV), frequency of adverse events (related to weaning) and overall quality of life. We planned sensitivity and subgroup analyses to assess (1) the influence on mortality and VAP of excluding quasi-randomized trials, and (2) effects on mortality and weaning failure associated with different causes of respiratory failure (COPD vs. mixed populations).
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 5, 2013), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2013), EMBASE (January 1980 to May 2013), proceedings from four conferences, trial registration websites and personal files; we contacted authors to identify trials comparing NPPV versus conventional IPPV weaning.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized and quasi-randomized trials comparing early extubation with immediate application of NPPV versus IPPV weaning in intubated adults with respiratory failure.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and abstracted data according to prespecified criteria. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses assessed (1) the impact of excluding quasi-randomized trials, and (2) the effects on selected outcomes noted with different causes of respiratory failure.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified 16 trials, predominantly of moderate to good quality, involving 994 participants, most with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Compared with IPPV weaning, NPPV weaning significantly decreased mortality. The benefits for mortality were significantly greater in trials enrolling exclusively participants with COPD (risk ratio (RR) 0.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24 to 0.56) versus mixed populations (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.40). NPPV significantly reduced weaning failure (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.96) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.43); shortened length of stay in an intensive care unit (mean difference (MD) -5.59 days, 95% CI -7.90 to -3.28) and in hospital (MD -6.04 days, 95% CI -9.22 to -2.87); and decreased the total duration of ventilation (MD -5.64 days, 95% CI -9.50 to -1.77) and the duration of endotracheal mechanical ventilation (MD - 7.44 days, 95% CI -10.34 to -4.55) amidst significant heterogeneity. Noninvasive weaning also significantly reduced tracheostomy (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.47) and reintubation (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.97) rates. Noninvasive weaning had no effect on the duration of ventilation related to weaning. Exclusion of a single quasi-randomized trial did not alter these results. Subgroup analyses suggest that the benefits for mortality were significantly greater in trials enrolling exclusively participants with COPD versus mixed populations.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Summary estimates from 16 trials of moderate to good quality that included predominantly participants with COPD suggest that a weaning strategy that includes NPPV may reduce rates of mortality and ventilator-associated pneumonia without increasing the risk of weaning failure or reintubation.

PMID: 24323843 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

Search