Rapid improvement of peak flow in asthmatic patients treated with parenteral methylprednisolone in the emergency department: A randomized controlled study

Out-of-Hospital Presentation and Management of Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Exacerbations in the United States: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To describe the demographic, clinical, and emergency medical service (EMS) response characteristics associated with EMS activations for asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations in the US.

METHODS

Using a nationwide set of out-of-hospital patient care report data from 2018 to 2019, we analyzed 9-1-1 EMS activations where asthma/COPD exacerbation was indicated by symptom, impression, or treatment provided. We excluded patients with ages less than 2 years or unknown, nonemergency transports, and encounters with any indication of anaphylaxis. Demographic, clinical, and EMS response characteristics were described for pediatric and adult patients with asthma/COPD exacerbations.

RESULTS

A total of 1,336,988 asthma/COPD exacerbations were included, comprising 5% of qualifying 9-1-1 scene activations from 2018 to 2019. Most patients were adults (96%). Most adult patients were female (55%), whereas most pediatric patients were male (58%). Most activations occurred in urban settings (82%), particularly in pediatric patients (90%). Most asthma/COPD exacerbations were managed by advanced life support units (94%). Inhaled bronchodilators and systemic corticosteroid therapy were administered to 75% and 14% of all patients, respectively. Adults more often had oxygen saturation <92% (43% vs 20% of pediatric patients) and were more often treated with assisted ventilation (9% vs 1%).

CONCLUSION

In this large nationwide sample of 9-1-1 activations treated and transported by EMS, 5% were for asthma/COPD exacerbation. Future work should focus on evidence-based standardization of EMS protocols and practice for asthma/COPD exacerbations to improve the quality of EMS care.

The Clinical Course of Asthma After Withdrawal of Inhaled Corticosteroids

BACKGROUND

Maintenance of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) is recommended in adults with asthma. However, adherence rates in patients with mild asthma and side effects of long-term ICS use can lead to withdrawal.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the real-world outcomes of ICS withdrawal by analyzing data from the Korean National Health Insurance database.

METHODS

Based on claims data from the National Health Insurance of Korea between 2011 and 2014, we identified patients diagnosed with asthma without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or long-term systemic steroid use who had an ICS medication possession rate of more than 50% in a year. We compared patients who received ICS consistently (maintenance group) with patients who had no ICS prescription for more than 6 months (withdrawal group). We evaluated exacerbation leading to prescription of systemic steroid and emergency department visit or hospitalization.

RESULTS

Excluding patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and long-term systemic steroid users, we identified 145,511 patients for the asthma cohort (mean age, 60.0 years; ever-smoker, 63.5%): 132,175 maintained ICS and 13,336 withdrew ICS for more than 6 months. Only 71 patients (0.5%) experienced exacerbation leading to an emergency department visit or hospitalization in the withdrawal group. ICS was restarted within 1 year for 33.6% of the withdrawal group, and 90% of these patients restarted ICS within 158 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide study of patients with asthma, characterized by a high proportion of elderly and smokers, showed that ICS withdrawal in about 10% of patients appeared to confer relatively minimal harm and exacerbation leading to hospitalization was not common. Further prospective studies are warranted to carefully explore the safety of ICS withdrawal in younger, nonsmoking, and well-controlled patients with asthma.

Short-term oral corticosteroids for initial treatment of moderate-to-severe persistent asthma: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate that on the basis of ICS-LABA treatment, whether or not adding on short course of oral corticosteroid could increase the rate of asthma control.

METHODOLOGY

This was a double blind, randomized controlled study. Patients with moderate to severe persistent asthma who are maintenance treatment naïve were recruited from the out-patients clinic. All patients included in the study received ICS-LABA as initial treatment. Two weeks oral corticosteroid or placebo were added on at the beginning of treatment. All the subjects were followed-up by daily measurement of PEF and asthma diary for 12 week and spirometry at 4 weeks and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

13 cases were randomized to Corticosteroid group (M/F: 9/4, age: 45.0 ± 5.0 yrs), 11 to Placebo group (M/F: 4/7, age: 35.7 ± 9.6yrs). After treatment, significant improvement in ACT、ACQ、AQLQ、FEV1、FEV1% were observed in both groups as compared with baseline data (all P < 0.05). However, there were no significant difference between two groups in the improvement of ACT、ACQ、AQLQ、FEV1、FEV1% (all P > 0.05). After 4 weeks of treatment, total control was achieved in 3 (30.8%) in corticosteroid group and 2 (18.2%) in placebo group; Partial control was achieved in 7 (61.5%)in corticosteroid group and in 7 (63.6%) in placebo group. There was no significant difference in control rates between two groups (X² = 0.919, P = 0.632). Similar findings were observed after 12 weeks of treatment.

CONCLUSION

In maintenance treatment naïve moderate to severe persistent asthma, ICS-LABA therapy was adequate initial treatment for achieving asthma control in majority of the patients. Add on short course of oral corticosteroid provided no significant clinical benefit.

Adult Patients with Respiratory Distress: Current Evidence-based Recommendations for Prehospital Care

INTRODUCTION

We developed evidence-based recommendations for prehospital evaluation and treatment of adult patients with respiratory distress. These recommendations are compared with current protocols used by the 33 local emergency medical services agencies (LEMSA) in California.

METHODS

We performed a review of the evidence in the prehospital treatment of adult patients with respiratory distress. The quality of evidence was rated and used to form guidelines. We then compared the respiratory distress protocols of each of the 33 LEMSAs for consistency with these recommendations.

RESULTS

PICO (population/problem, intervention, control group, outcome) questions investigated were treatment with oxygen, albuterol, ipratropium, steroids, nitroglycerin, furosemide, and non-invasive ventilation. Literature review revealed that oxygen titration to no more than 94-96% for most acutely ill medical patients and to 88-92% in patients with acute chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation is associated with decreased mortality. In patients with bronchospastic disease, the data shows improved symptoms and peak flow rates after the administration of albuterol. There is limited data regarding prehospital use of ipratropium, and the benefit is less clear. The literature supports the use of systemic steroids in those with asthma and COPD to improve symptoms and decrease hospital admissions. There is weak evidence to support the use of nitrates in critically ill, hypertensive patients with acute pulmonary edema (APE) and moderate evidence that furosemide may be harmful if administered prehospital to patients with suspected APE. Non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) is shown in the literature to be safe and effective in the treatment of respiratory distress due to acute pulmonary edema, bronchospasm, and other conditions. It decreases both mortality and the need for intubation. Albuterol, nitroglycerin, and NIPPV were found in the protocols of every LEMSA. Ipratropium, furosemide, and oxygen titration were found in a proportion of the protocols, and steroids were not prescribed in any LEMSA protocol.

CONCLUSION

Prehospital treatment of adult patients with respiratory distress varies widely across California. We present evidence-based recommendations for the prehospital treatment of undifferentiated adult patients with respiratory distress that will assist with standardizing management and may be useful for EMS medical directors when creating and revising protocols.

Combined inhaled beta-agonist and anticholinergic agents for emergency management in adults with asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled short-acting anticholinergics (SAAC) and short-acting beta₂-agonists (SABA) are effective therapies for adult patients with acute asthma who present to the emergency department (ED). It is unclear, however, whether the combination of SAAC and SABA treatment is more effective in reducing hospitalisations compared to treatment with SABA alone.

OBJECTIVES

To conduct an up-to-date systematic search and meta-analysis on the effectiveness of combined inhaled therapy (SAAC + SABA agents) vs. SABA alone to reduce hospitalisations in adult patients presenting to the ED with an exacerbation of asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SCOPUS, LILACS, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global and evidence-based medicine (EBM) databases using controlled vocabulary, natural language terms, and a variety of specific and general terms for inhaled SAAC and SABA drugs. The search spanned from 1946 to July 2015. The Cochrane Airways Group provided search results from the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials which was most recently conducted in July 2016. An extensive search of the grey literature was completed to identify any other potentially relevant studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Included studies were randomised or controlled clinical trials comparing the effectiveness of combined inhaled therapy (SAAC and SABA) to SABA treatment alone to prevent hospitalisations in adults with acute asthma in the emergency department. Two independent review authors assessed studies for inclusion using pre-determined criteria.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated individual and pooled statistics as risk ratios (RR) or odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model and reporting heterogeneity (I²). For continuous outcomes, we reported individual trial results using mean differences (MD) and pooled results as weighted mean differences (WMD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 23 studies that involved a total of 2724 enrolled participants. Most studies were rated at unclear or high risk of bias.Overall, participants receiving combination inhaled therapy were less likely to be hospitalised (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.87; participants = 2120; studies = 16; I² = 12%; moderate quality of evidence). An estimated 65 fewer patients per 1000 would require hospitalisation after receiving combination therapy (95% 30 to 95), compared to 231 per 1000 patients receiving SABA alone. Although combination inhaled therapy was more effective than SABA treatment alone in reducing hospitalisation in participants with severe asthma exacerbations, this was not found for participants with mild or moderate exacerbations (test for difference between subgroups P = 0.02).Participants receiving combination therapy were more likely to experience improved forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) (MD 0.25 L, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.48; participants = 687; studies = 6; I² = 70%; low quality of evidence), peak expiratory flow (PEF) (MD 36.58 L/min, 95% CI 23.07 to 50.09; participants = 1056; studies = 12; I² = 25%; very low quality of evidence), increased percent change in PEF from baseline (MD 24.88, 95% CI 14.83 to 34.93; participants = 551; studies = 7; I² = 23%; moderate quality of evidence), and were less likely to return to the ED for additional care (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 1180; studies = 5; I² = 0%; moderate quality of evidence) than participants receiving SABA alone.Participants receiving combination inhaled therapy were more likely to experience adverse events than those treated with SABA agents alone (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.28 to 3.20; participants = 1392; studies = 11; I² = 14%; moderate quality of evidence). Among patients receiving combination therapy, 103 per 1000 were likely to report adverse events (95% 31 to 195 more) compared to 131 per 1000 patients receiving SABA alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, combination inhaled therapy with SAAC and SABA reduced hospitalisation and improved pulmonary function in adults presenting to the ED with acute asthma. In particular, combination inhaled therapy was more effective in preventing hospitalisation in adults with severe asthma exacerbations who are at increased risk of hospitalisation, compared to those with mild-moderate exacerbations, who were at a lower risk to be hospitalised. A single dose of combination therapy and multiple doses both showed reductions in the risk of hospitalisation among adults with acute asthma. However, adults receiving combination therapy were more likely to experience adverse events, such as tremor, agitation, and palpitations, compared to patients receiving SABA alone.

Corticosteroids in the treatment of acute asthma

Asthma is a prevalent chronic disease of the respiratory system and acute asthma exacerbations are among the most common causes of presentation to the emergency department (ED) and admission to hospital particularly in children. Bronchial airways inflammation is the most prominent pathological feature of asthma. Inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), through their anti-inflammatory effects have been the mainstay of treatment of asthma for many years. Systemic and ICS are also used in the treatment of acute asthma exacerbations. Several international asthma management guidelines recommend the use of systemic corticosteroids in the management of moderate to severe acute asthma early upon presentation to the ED. On the other hand, ICS use in the management acute asthma has been studied in different contexts with encouraging results in some and negative in others. This review sheds some light on the role of systemic and ICS in the management of acute asthma and discusses the current evidence behind their different ways of application particularly in relation to new developments in the field.

Spirometry and PRAM severity score changes during pediatric acute asthma exacerbation treatment in a pediatric emergency department

OBJECTIVES

To examine the time-dependent changes of spirometry (percent-predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second [%FEV(1)]) and the Pediatric Respiratory Assessment Measure (PRAM) during the treatment of acute asthma exacerbations.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a prospective study of participants aged 5-17 years with acute asthma exacerbations managed in a Pediatric Emergency Department. %FEV(1) and the PRAM were recorded pretreatment and at 2 and 4 hours. We examined responses at 2 and 4 hours following treatment and assessed whether the changes of %FEV(1) and of the PRAM differed during the first and the second 2-hour treatment periods.

RESULTS

Among 503 participants, median [interquartile range, IQR] age was 8.8 [6.9, 11.4], 61% were male, and 63% were African-American. There was significant mean change of %FEV(1) during the first (+15.4%; 95% CI 13.7 to 17.1; p < .0001), but not during the second (+1.5%; 95% CI -0.8 to 3.8; p = .21), 2-hour period and of the PRAM during the first (-2.1 points; 95% CI -2.3 to -1.9; p < .0001) and the second (-1.0 point; 95% CI -1.3 to -0.7; p < .0001) 2-hour periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Most improvement of lung function and clinical severity occur in the first 2 hours of treatment. Among pediatric patients with acute asthma exacerbations, the PRAM detects significant and clinically meaningful change of severity during the second 2-hour treatment, whereas spirometry does not. This suggests that spirometry and clinical severity scores do not have similar trajectories and that clinical severity scores may be more sensitive to clinical change of acute asthma severity than spirometry.

Early use of inhaled corticosteroids in the emergency department treatment of acute asthma

BACKGROUND

Systemic corticosteroid therapy is central to the management of acute asthma. The use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) may also be beneficial in this setting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefit of ICS for the treatment of patients with acute asthma managed in the emergency department (ED).

SEARCH METHODS

We identified controlled clinical trials from the Cochrane Airways Group specialised register of controlled trials. Bibliographies from included studies, known reviews, and texts also were searched. The latest search was September 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. Studies were included if patients presented to the ED or its equivalent with acute asthma, and were treated with ICS or placebo, in addition to standard therapy. Two review authors independently selected potentially relevant articles, and then independently selected articles for inclusion. Methodological quality was independently assessed by two review authors. There were three different types of studies that were included in this review: 1) studies comparing ICS vs. placebo, with no systemic corticosteroids given to either treatment group, 2) studies comparing ICS vs. placebo, with systemic corticosteroids given to both treatment groups, and 3) studies comparing ICS alone versus systemic corticosteroids. For the analysis, the first two types of studies were included as separate subgroups in the primary analysis (ICS vs. placebo), while the third type of study was included in the secondary analysis (ICS vs. systemic corticosteroid).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two review authors if the authors were unable to verify the validity of extracted information. Missing data were obtained from the authors or calculated from other data presented in the paper. Where appropriate, individual and pooled dichotomous outcomes were reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where appropriate, individual and pooled continuous outcomes were reported as mean differences (MD) or standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. The primary analysis employed a fixed-effect model and a random-effects model was used for sensitivity analysis. Heterogeneity is reported using I-squared (I(2)) statistics.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty trials were selected for inclusion in the primary analysis (13 paediatric, seven adult), with a total number of 1403 patients. Patients treated with ICS were less likely to be admitted to hospital (OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.62; 12 studies; 960 patients) and heterogeneity (I(2) = 27%) was modest. This represents a reduction from 32 to 17 hospital admissions per 100 patients treated with ICS in comparison with placebo. Subgroup analysis of hospital admissions based on concomitant systemic corticosteroid use revealed that both subgroups indicated benefit from ICS in reducing hospital admissions (ICS and systemic corticosteroid versus systemic corticosteroid: OR 0.54; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.81; 5 studies; N = 433; ICS versus placebo: OR 0.27; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.52; 7 studies; N = 527). However, there was moderate heterogeneity in the subgroup using ICS in addition to systemic steroids (I(2) = 52%). Patients receiving ICS demonstrated small, significant improvements in peak expiratory flow (PEF: MD 7%; 95% CI 3% to 11%) and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1): MD 6%; 95% CI 2% to 10%) at three to four hours post treatment). Only a small number of studies reported these outcomes such that they could be included in the meta-analysis and most of the studies in this comparison did not administer systemic corticosteroids to either treatment group. There was no evidence of significant adverse effects from ICS treatment with regard to tremor or nausea and vomiting. In the secondary analysis of studies comparing ICS alone versus systemic corticosteroid alone, heterogeneity among the studies complicated pooling of data or drawing reliable conclusions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

ICS therapy reduces hospital admissions in patients with acute asthma who are not treated with oral or intravenous corticosteroids. They may also reduce admissions when they are used in addition to systemic corticosteroids; however, the most recent evidence is conflicting. There is insufficient evidence that ICS therapy results in clinically important changes in pulmonary function or clinical scores when used in acute asthma in addition to systemic corticosteroids. Also, there is insufficient evidence that ICS therapy can be used in place of systemic corticosteroid therapy when treating acute asthma. Further research is needed to clarify the most appropriate drug dosage and delivery device, and to define which patients are most likely to benefit from ICS therapy. Use of similar measures and reporting methods of lung function, and a common, validated, clinical score would be helpful in future versions of this meta-analysis.

The Acute Asthma Severity Assessment Protocol (AASAP) study: objectives and methods of a study to develop an acute asthma clinical prediction rule

Acute asthma exacerbations are one of the most common reasons for paediatric emergency department visits and hospitalisations, and a relapse frequently necessitates repeat urgent care. While care plans exist, there are no acute asthma prediction rules (APRs) to assess severity and predict outcome. The primary objective of the Acute Asthma Severity Assessment Protocol study is to develop a multivariable APR for acute asthma exacerbations in paediatric patients. A prospective, convenience sample of paediatric patients aged 5-17 years with acute asthma exacerbations who present to an urban, academic, tertiary paediatric emergency department was enrolled. The study protocol and data analysis plan conform to accepted biostatistical and clinical standards for clinical prediction rule development. Modelling of the APR will be performed once the entire sample size of 1500 has accrued. It is anticipated that the APR will improve resource utilisation in the emergency department, aid in standardisation of disease assessment and allow physician and non-physician providers to participate in earlier objective decision making. The objective of this report is to describe the study objectives and detailed methodology of the Acute Asthma Severity Assessment Protocol study.

Usefulness of inhaled magnesium sulfate in the coadjuvant management of severe asthma crisis in an emergency department

RATIONALE

Treatment of severe asthma may be difficult despite the use of several medications including parenteral corticosteroids. Intravenous magnesium sulfate (MgSO(4)) is one ancillary drug for severe crisis; its inhaled use is controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the usefulness of inhaled MgSO(4) compared to placebo in improving lung function, oxygen saturation, and reducing hospital admission as an adjunct to standard treatment in severe asthma crisis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial with asthmatic patients >18 years of age with asthmatic crisis and FEV(1)<60% of predicted (%p). All subjects received 125 mg of IV methylprednisolone followed by nebulization with the combination of albuterol (7.5mg) and ipratropium bromide (1.5mg) diluted in 3 ml of isotonic saline solution (as placebo) or 3 ml (333 mg) of MgSO(4). After 90 min, subjects with FEV(1)<60%p or SpO(2)<88% or persistent symptoms were admitted to the emergency department (ED).

RESULTS

We included 30 patients per group who were similar at baseline. The MgSO(4) group showed higher post-bronchodilator (post-BD) FEV(1)%p (69+/-13 vs. 61+/-12, p<0.014) and SpO(2) (92+/-4 vs. 88+/-5%, p<0.006) than the placebo group. Fewer treated patients were admitted to the ED (5 vs. 13) (p<0.047), with relative risk (RR) of 0.26 (95% CI 0.079-0.870).

CONCLUSIONS

Adding inhaled MgSO(4) treatment to standard therapy in severe asthma crisis improves FEV(1)%p and SpO(2) post-BD and reduces the rate of ED admissions.

An umbrella review: corticosteroid therapy for adults with acute asthma

The objective of this "umbrella" review is to synthesize the evidence and provide clinicians a single report that summarizes the state of knowledge regarding the use of corticosteroids in adults with acute asthma. Systematic reviews in the Cochrane Library and additional clinical trials published in English from 1966 to 2007 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL, and references from bibliographies of pertinent articles were reviewed. Results indicate that the evidence base is frequently limited to small, single-center studies. Findings suggest that therapy with systemic corticosteroids accelerates the resolution of acute asthma and reduces the risk of relapse. There is no evidence that corticosteroid doses greater than standard doses (prednisone 50-100 mg equivalent) are beneficial. Oral and intravenous corticosteroids, as well as intramuscular and oral corticosteroid regimens, seem to be similarly effective. A nontapered 5- to 10-day course of corticosteroid therapy seems to be sufficient for most discharged patients. Combinations of oral and inhaled corticosteroids on emergency department/hospital discharge might minimize the risk of relapse.

Acute severe asthma

Acute severe asthma remains a major economic and health burden. The natural history of acute decompensations is one of resolution and only about 0.4% of patients succumb overall. Mortality in medical intensive care units is higher but is less than 3% of hospital admissions. "Near-fatal" episodes may be more frequent, but precise figures are lacking. However, about 30% of medical intensive care unit admissions require intubation and mechanical ventilation with mortality of 8%. Morbidity and mortality increase with socioeconomic deprivation and ethnicity. Seventy to 80% of patients in emergency departments clear within 2 hours with standardized care. The relapse rate varies between 7 and 15%, depending on how aggressively the patient is treated. The airway obstruction in the 20-30% of people resistant to adrenergic agonists in the emergency department slowly reverses over 36-48 hours but requires intense treatment to do so. Current therapeutic options for this group consist of ipratropium and corticosteroids in combination with beta2 selective drugs. Even so, such regimens are not optimal and better approaches are needed. The long-term prognosis after a near-fatal episode is poor and mortality may approach 10%.

A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of dexamethasone for bronchiolitis

BACKGROUND

Bronchiolitis, the most common infection of the lower respiratory tract in infants, is a leading cause of hospitalization in childhood. Corticosteroids are commonly used to treat bronchiolitis, but evidence of their effectiveness is limited.

METHODS

We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial comparing a single dose of oral dexamethasone (1 mg per kilogram of body weight) with placebo in 600 children (age range, 2 to 12 months) with a first episode of wheezing diagnosed in the emergency department as moderate-to-severe bronchiolitis (defined by a Respiratory Distress Assessment Instrument score > or =6). We enrolled patients at 20 emergency departments during the months of November through April over a 3-year period. The primary outcome was hospital admission after 4 hours of emergency department observation. The secondary outcome was the Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS). We also evaluated later outcomes: length of hospital stay, later medical visits or admissions, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. The admission rate was 39.7% for children assigned to dexamethasone, as compared with 41.0% for those assigned to placebo (absolute difference, -1.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.2 to 6.5). Both groups had respiratory improvement during observation; the mean 4-hour RACS was -5.3 for dexamethasone, as compared with -4.8 for placebo (absolute difference, -0.5; 95% CI, -1.3 to 0.3). Multivariate adjustment did not significantly alter the results, nor were differences detected in later outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In infants with acute moderate-to-severe bronchiolitis who were treated in the emergency department, a single dose of 1 mg of oral dexamethasone per kilogram did not significantly alter the rate of hospital admission, the respiratory status after 4 hours of observation, or later outcomes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00119002 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Systemic corticosteroid therapy for acute asthma exacerbations

Acute exacerbations of asthma may represent reactions to airway irritants or failures of chronic treatment. The costs to both the patient and society are high. Exacerbations often are frightening episodes that can cause significant morbidity and sometimes death. The emergency department (ED) visits and hospitalizations often required lead to significant health care expenses. Thus, preventing and optimizing management of acute exacerbations is critical. Corticosteroids are a cornerstone of asthma therapy. They have been shown to lower admission rates and reduce risk of relapse. This article provides an overview of the role of corticosteroids (including betamethasone, dexamethasone, methylprednisolone, and prednisolone) in the management of acute asthma exacerbations, with an aim toward effective decision making about the choice of therapy.

Rapid anti-secretory effects of glucocorticoids in human airway epithelium

Glucocorticoids are anti-inflammatory molecules classically described as acting through a genomic pathway. Similar to many steroid hormones, glucocorticoids also induce rapid non-genomic responses. The present paper provides a general overview of the rapid non-genomic effects of glucocorticoids in airway and will be mainly focused on a retrospective of the authors work on rapid effects of glucocorticoids in airway epithelial cell transport. Using fluorescence microscopy, short circuit current measurements in human bronchial epithelial (16HBE14o(-)) cells, we reported rapid non-genomic effects of dexamethasone on cell signalling and ion transport. Dexamethasone (1 nM) rapidly stimulated Na(+)/H(+) exchanger activity and pH(i) regulation in 16HBE14o(-) cells. Dexamethasone also produced a rapid decrease of intracellular [Ca(2+)](i) to a new steady state concentration and inhibited the large and transient [Ca(2+)](i) increase induced by apical adenosine tri-phosphate (ATP). Dexamethasone also reduced by 1/3 the Ca(2+)-dependent Cl(-) secretion induced by apical ATP. The rapid effects of dexamethasone on intracellular pH and Ca(2+) were not affected by inhibitors of transcription, cycloheximide or by the classical glucocorticoid and mineralocorticoid receptors antagonists, RU486 and spironolactone, respectively. The rapid responses to glucocorticoid were reduced by the inhibitors of adenylated cyclase, cAMP-dependent protein kinase (PKA) and mitogen-activated protein kinase (ERK1/2). Our results demonstrate, that dexamethasone at low concentrations, rapidly regulates intracellular pH, Ca(2+) and PKA activity and inhibits Cl(-) secretion in human bronchial epithelial cells via a non-genomic mechanism which neither involve the classical glucocorticoid nor mineralocorticoid receptor.

Severe bronchoconstriction after bronchoalveolar lavage in a dog with eosinophilic airway disease

Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is considered to be a safe procedure in humans and other animals. However, in some instances, potentially life-threatening complications can arise. In this clinical report, a dog with eosinophilic airway disease that underwent a BAL and subsequently became profoundly dyspneic during the recovery period is described. The dyspnea was severe enough to warrant mechanical ventilation for almost 24 hours. Several anti-inflammatory and bronchodilatory medications were also used. The dog was successfully weaned off the ventilator and made a full recovery. On the basis of radiographic findings and clinical response to treatment, we believe the dog had acute exacerbation of eosinophilic airway disease and severe bronchoconstriction secondary to the BAL. Caution should be exercised when performing a BAL if there is suspicion of a reactive airway disease.

Zafirlukast treatment for acute asthma: evaluation in a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial

CONTEXT

Acute asthma causes nearly 2 million hospital emergency department (ED) visits in the United States annually, and hospitalization after an ED visit and relapse after ED discharge are common.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the adding of therapy with zafirlukast to standardized care for patients with acute asthma in the ED and a 28-day follow-up period.

DESIGN AND PATIENTS

A total of 641 patients presenting to the ED with acute asthma were randomized to receive either single-dose zafirlukast, 160 mg (Z160) [162 patients], zafirlukast, 20 mg (Z20) [158 patients]), or placebo (321 patients) as adjunct treatment to standard care in this double-blind, multicenter trial. Assessments, including spirometry and symptom scores, were obtained before each albuterol treatment and at 4 h. Patients who were discharged from the ED after 4 h continued outpatient therapy over a 28-day period and received either Z20 bid (276 patients) or placebo (270 patients) in addition to prednisone, albuterol, and their previous asthma medications. FEV(1) was measured at clinic visits on days 10 and 28. Patients recorded outpatient clinical data twice daily on a home diary card.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

the effect of zafirlukast on relapse after ED discharge. Other assessments were the rate of extended care (ie, ED stay for > 4 h or hospitalization), FEV(1), and symptoms.

RESULTS

At the end of the outpatient period, 65 of 276 patients (23.6%) treated with zafirlukast and 78 of 270 patients (28.9%) treated with placebo relapsed (p = 0.047; absolute reduction, 5.3%; relative reduction, 18.3%). At the end of the ED period, 16 of 162 patients (9.9%) treated with Z160, 26 of 158 patients (16.5%) treated with Z20, and 48 of 321 patients (15.0%) treated with placebo required extended care (p = 0.052; absolute reduction with Z160 compared to placebo, 5.1%; relative reduction, 34%). These findings were supported by a significant improvement in FEV(1) and dyspnea in the ED with the use of Z160 therapy, and by greater improvement in FEV(1) and symptoms during the outpatient period for patients treated with Z20.

CONCLUSIONS

When added to standardized care, therapy with Z20 bid reduced the risk of relapse compared with placebo over a 28-day treatment period. One dose of Z160 in the ED also reduced the rate of extended care.

Severe exacerbations of asthma

All asthmatics regardless of their perceived severity, are at risk of exacerbation, particularly if they are suboptimally treated in the outpatient arena. Fortunately most patients recover after administration of bronchodilators and anti-inflammatory medications, but preventable deaths continue to occur and refractory cases result in hospitalization and need for mechanical ventilation. We begin this article by reviewing the pathophysiology of acute exacerbations to build a foundation for the assessment of clinical status and to provide the rationale for a carefully contemplated and evidence-based therapeutic approach. We end this article with an in-depth examination of the particular problems that are encountered during mechanical ventilation and offer a strategy that helps minimize complications. In the final analysis, however, the greatest gains in the field of acute asthma will come not from its treatment but from its prevention by enhanced educational and environmental efforts and by the delivery of optimal medications at home.

The prehospital administration of intravenous methylprednisolone lowers hospital admission rates for moderate to severe asthma

OBJECTIVE

To compare hospital admission rates for patients with moderate to severe asthma who receive intravenous methylprednisolone given in the prehospital setting versus in the emergency department.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was used to identify emergency medical services (EMS) transports of patients with moderate to severe asthma when 125 mg methylprednisolone was given intravenously in the prehospital setting under existing regional protocols. Data were collected on EMS runs in an urban/suburban system from May 1, 2000, through April 30, 2001. Only patients 18 to 50 years old with a history of asthma were included in the study. Patients were excluded if they left against medical advice, were long-term smokers, used home oxygen, or had a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A parallel search was performed from February 1, 1999, to April 30, 2000, to identify moderate-severe asthmatics who were transported by EMS and later given intravenous methylprednisolone in the emergency department. During this period, methylprednisolone was not available for use in this EMS system.

RESULTS

A total of 31 moderate to severe asthmatics were identified as receiving prehospital methylprednisolone. A total of 33 asthmatics were identified who were transported by EMS and later received intravenous methylprednisolone in the emergency department. Average patient age in the prehospital methylprednisolone group was 34+/-10 years (mean+/-standard deviation; 95% confidence interval [CI]=31-37). Average age in the hospital group was 34+/-10 years (95% CI=31-37). Average time to administration of methylprednisolone in the prehospital setting was 15+/-7 minutes (95% CI=7-22). The average time elapsed in the emergency department before methylprednisolone was 40+/-22 minutes (95% CI=23-57). Only 12.9% (4) of the patients receiving prehospital solumedrol were admitted versus 33.3% (11) of those receiving the medication in the emergency department (p=0.025). Patients were 3.375 times more likely to be admitted if they received methylprednisolone in the emergency department versus in the prehospital setting.

CONCLUSION

Patients with moderate to severe asthma who receive intravenous methylprednisolone in the prehospital setting have significantly fewer hospital admissions.

Guidelines reduce x-ray and blood gas utilization in acute asthma

Using a retrospective chart review, we compared the use of chest radiography (CXR) and arterial blood gas testing (ABG) before (pre-P) and after (post-P) initiation of specific ordering guidelines for the use of these studies for patients presenting to the ED with acute asthma exacerbation. We noted the number of tests performed, the indication for the test, and the results when performed. There was a 55% reduction in the number of chest radiographs (85 of 213 patients pre-P had CXR as compared with 40 of 222 patients post-P, P <.001). Of the patients who did not have a chest x-ray in the ED, none had an abnormal chest x-ray obtained after admission or if they returned to the ED within 72 hours. There was a 57% reduction in the number of arterial blood gases post-P (9 of 222 patients) as compared with pre-P (20 of 213 patients, P <.001). Although patients with abnormal ABGs had a discernible indication for testing, all of the ABGs for which no indication could be found were normal. A protocol containing criteria for obtaining chest x-rays and arterial blood gas testing can reduce the use of diagnostic testing, thereby improving ED efficiency without adversely impacting patient care.

Asthma evaluation and management

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory illness with acute exacerbations, which often is encountered in the ED setting. Knowledge of the presentation and treatment of asthma is crucial for any physician treating patients with this disease. Beta-agonist, anticholinergic, and corticosteroid therapy continue to be the mainstay of emergency therapy despite advances in newer medications. Proper attention to long-term treatment of asthma and aggressive treatment of acute exacerbations should help reduce morbidity and mortality.

Efficacy of a consensus protocol therapy in adults with acute, severe asthma

BACKGROUND

International guidelines recommend multiple doses of inhaled beta2-agonists and anticholinergics plus early administration of systemic corticosteroids for acute, severe asthma. This study examined the efficacy of this protocol in adults and analyzed those factors associated with unresponsiveness to the protocol therapy.

OBJECTIVE

Ninety-three consecutive patients 18 to 55 years old presenting for treatment of acute asthma with a peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) < or = 50% of the predicted value were analyzed.

METHODS

All subjects received 400 microg of salbutamol every 20 minutes for three doses and 400 microg of oxitropium bromide with each of the three salbutamol doses by means of a metered-dose inhaler with a spacer device, plus intravenously 8 mg betamethasone. PEFR was measured at baseline and at 20, 40, 60, and 120 minutes.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine percent of subjects improved sufficiently to be discharged. In 31% of subjects, the protocol therapy failed. There were no significant differences in age, sex, smoking status, or beta-agonist use within 6 hours between the two groups. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that a PEFR < 35% of the predicted value at presentation (odds ratio [OR]; 16.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5 to 59.9), viral respiratory tract infection symptoms > or = 2 days (OR, 4.8, 95% CI 1.3 to 17.1), and asthma hospitalization in the past year (OR, 4.6, 95% CI 1.1 to 19.9) were significantly associated with unresponsiveness to the protocol.

CONCLUSIONS

Unresponsiveness to protocol therapy occurs in nearly one-third of individuals presenting with acute, severe asthma. Our findings underscore the need to explore more effective strategies for improving lung function and reducing hospital admission rates.

Beclomethasone rapidly ablates allergen-induced beta 2-adrenoceptor pathway dysfunction in human isolated bronchi

Bronchial rings from nonatopic humans were passively sensitized with serum from allergic subjects. Allergen challenge significantly reduced the relaxant effect of salbutamol on carbachol-induced contractions, suggesting beta(2)-adrenoceptor (beta(2)-AR) pathway dysfunction. Incubation of challenged rings for 3 h with 3 x 10(-6) M beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) restored the relaxant effect, suggesting reversal of beta(2)-AR pathway dysfunction. Incubation with the G(s)alpha protein-stimulating cholera toxin attenuated contractile responses to carbachol significantly less in challenged than in unchallenged rings. Treatment of challenged rings with BDP resulted in an inhibitory effect of cholera toxin that was similar to the effect in unchallenged rings. G(s)alpha protein expression was not significantly altered by BDP, suggesting that the activity of G(s)alpha protein was increased. Relaxation of challenged rings by forskolin was not significantly affected by BDP, suggesting that beta(2)-AR pathway dysfunction was proximal to the adenylyl cyclase. In conclusion, short-term (3-h) treatment with BDP after allergen challenge ablated beta(2)-AR pathway dysfunction by increasing the activity of the G(s)alpha protein in human isolated bronchi.

Early use of inhaled corticosteroids in the emergency department treatment of acute asthma

BACKGROUND

Systemic corticosteroid therapy is central to the management of acute asthma The use of inhaled corticosteroids may also be beneficial in this setting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefit of inhaled corticosteroids for the treatment of patients with acute asthma managed in the emergency department (ED).

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from the Cochrane Airways Review Group register. Bibliographies from included studies, known reviews, and texts also were searched. The search is considered updated to February of 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only RCTs or quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Studies were included if patients presented with acute asthma to the ED or its equivalent, and were treated with inhaled corticosteroids or placebo, in addition to standard therapy. Two reviewers independently selected potentially relevant articles, and then independently selected articles for inclusion. Methodological quality was independently assessed by two reviewers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two reviewers if the authors were unable to verify the validity of extracted information. Missing data were obtained from the authors or calculated from other data presented in the paper.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight trials were selected for inclusion, but data were not available for one of them. In the seven usable trials, (4 adult, 3 paediatric), a total of 376 patients were studied (191 with inhaled corticosteroids, 185 without). Patients treated with inhaled corticosteroids were less likely to be admitted to hospital (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.16, 0.57). This benefit was evident in the subgroup of patients not receiving concomitant systemic steroids (OR 0.21; 95% CI: 0.08, 0.53). Patients receiving concomitant systemic steroids showed a similar, but non-significant, trend towards reduced admissions compared to placebo treatment (OR 0.45; 95% CI: 0.18, 1.12). Patients receiving inhaled corticosteroids also demonstrated small, significant improvements in peak expiratory flows (PEFR WMD: 8%; 95% CI: 3, 13 %) and forced expiratory volumes (FEV1 WMD: 5%; 95% CI: 0.4, 10 %). The treatment was well tolerated, with few reported adverse side effects. A secondary analysis compared inhaled corticosteroids alone vs systemic steroids alone; in the four trials included, there was significant heterogeneity between the study results for admission rates which precluded meaningful pooling of the study results.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Inhaled steroids reduced admission rates in patients with acute asthma, but it is unclear if there is a benefit of inhaled corticosteroids when used in addition to systemic corticosteroids. There is insufficient evidence that inhaled corticosteroids result in clinically important changes in pulmonary function or clinical scores when used in acute asthma. Similarly, there is insufficient evidence that inhaled corticosteroids alone are as effective as systemic steroids. Further research is needed to clarify if there is a benefit of inhaled corticosteroids when used in addition to systemic steroids.

A randomized clinical trial of nebulized magnesium sulfate in addition to albuterol in the treatment of acute mild-to-moderate asthma exacerbations in adults

STUDY OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of nebulized magnesium sulfate (MgSO(4)) plus albuterol with that of albuterol alone in adult patients with mild-to-moderate acute asthma exacerbations.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive nebulized MgSO(4) (384 mg in 6 mL of sterile water) or an equal volume of placebo (normal saline solution) in a double-blind fashion after each dose of nebulized albuterol administered (2.5 mg/3 mL) every 20 minutes for the first hour of the study. Spirometry was performed at baseline and every 20 minutes for 2 hours. Monitoring for safety included vital signs, pulse oximetry, and serum magnesium levels. Improvement in percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second was chosen as a primary efficacy end point.

RESULTS

Among 74 patients enrolled, 37 were randomized to each of 2 study groups. There were no statistically or clinically significant differences between the 2 study groups in percent predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 second at any point during the trial or overall. There were no significant differences in vital signs, pulse oximetry, or serum magnesium levels at any point during the study.

CONCLUSION

The combination of nebulized MgSO(4) and albuterol provides no benefit in addition to that provided by therapy with albuterol in adult patients with mild-to-moderate asthma exacerbations. The efficacy of nebulized MgSO(4) in patients with severe asthma exacerbations remains unknown.

Efficacy of oral dexamethasone in outpatients with acute bronchiolitis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficacy of oral dexamethasone in acute bronchiolitis.

STUDY DESIGN

A double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving 70 children < 24 months old in the emergency department with Respiratory Disease Assessment Instrument > or = 6. Each patient received either 1 dose of 1 mg/kg of oral dexamethasone or placebo and was assessed hourly for a 4-hour period. Repeated measures regression analysis evaluated a change in the Respiratory Assessment Change Score (RACS).

RESULTS

The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics with Respiratory Disease Assessment Inventory of 9.4 +/- 2.3 in the dexamethasone group (n = 36) and 10.0 +/- 2.7 in the placebo group (n = 34). The RACS was -5.0 +/- 3.1 in the dexamethasone group and -3.2 +/- 3.7 in the placebo group (P =.029). Poor RACS occurred in 41% and 17% of the placebo and dexamethasone groups, respectively (P =.034). Of the children treated with dexamethasone, 19% were hospitalized compared with 44% in the placebo group (P =.039). There was no difference in RACS between the groups on day 7 (P =.75).

CONCLUSION

Outpatients with moderate-to-severe acute bronchiolitis derive significant clinical and hospitalization benefit from oral dexamethasone treatment in the initial 4 hours of therapy.

Predictors of hospitalization in children with acute asthma

OBJECTIVE

To identify predictors of long duration of bronchodilator therapy in children with acute asthma.

STUDY DESIGN

An emergency department prospective cohort study of 278 children > or =12 months of age, with clinical and socioeconomic parameters collected at baseline and 4 hours after administration of corticosteroids. Patients were classified into short and long therapy groups, with interval from first albuterol dose to initiation of administration every 4 hours < or =12 or >12 hours, respectively. Predictors significant by univariate analysis were examined by multiple logistic regression.

RESULTS

Five variables were associated with long therapy (n = 85) versus short therapy (n = 193): previous intensive care unit admission (odds ratio [OR] 7.2, 95% CI = 1.85, 27.7); baseline oxygen saturation < or =92% (OR 2.6, 95% CI = 0.89, 7.4), asthma score > or =6/9 (OR 2.9, 95% CI = 1.9, 4.37), oxygen saturation < or =92% (OR 6.6, 95% CI = 1.34, 32.0), and hourly albuterol dosing interval (OR 4.3, 95% CI = 0.82, 22.12) 4 hours after administration of corticosteroids. Probability of long therapy was 91.8% to 99% for > or =3 predictors, but only 40.6% to 61.8% for individual factors.

CONCLUSION

A combination of 3 or more factors predicts long bronchodilator therapy and signals the need for hospitalization. Children with only one predictor can be safely treated in the emergency department or observation unit and reevaluated.

Comparative efficacy of oral dexamethasone versus oral prednisone in acute pediatric asthma

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to determine whether 2 days of oral dexamethasone (DEX) is more effective than 5 days of oral prednisone/prednisolone (PRED) in improving symptoms and preventing relapse in children with acute asthma.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a prospective randomized trial of children (2 to 18 years old) who presented to the emergency department with acute asthma. PRED 2 mg/kg, maximum 60 mg (odd days) or DEX 0.6 mg/kg, maximum 16 mg (even days) was used. At discharge children in the PRED group were prescribed 4 daily doses (1 mg/kg/d, maximum 60 mg); children in the DEX group received a prepackaged dose (0.6 mg/kg, maximum 16 mg) to take the next day. The primary outcome was relapse within 10 days.

RESULTS

When DEX was compared with PRED, relapse rates (7.4% of 272 vs 6.9% of 261), hospitalization rates from the emergency department (11% vs 12%) or after relapse (20% vs 17%), and symptom persistence at 10 days (22% vs 21%) were similar. In the PRED group more children were excluded for vomiting in the emergency department (3% vs 0.3%; P =.008), more parents were noncompliant (4% vs. 0.4%; P =.004), and more children missed > or =2 days of school (19.5% vs. 13.2%; P =.05).

CONCLUSION

In children with acute asthma, 2 doses of dexamethasone provide similar efficacy with improved compliance and fewer side effects than 5 doses of prednisone.

Asma aguda em adultos na sala de emergência: o manejo clínico na primeira hora

Asma é doença com alta prevalência em nosso meio e ao redor do mundo. Embora novas opções terapêuticas tenham sido recentemente desenvolvidas, parece haver aumento mundial na sua morbidade e mortalidade. Em muitas instituições, as exacerbações asmáticas ainda constituem emergência médica muito comum. As evidências têm demonstrado que a primeira hora no manejo da asma aguda na sala de emergência concentra decisões cruciais que podem determinar o desfecho desta situação clínica. Nesta revisão não-sistemática, os autores enfocaram a primeira hora da avaliação e tratamento do paciente com asma aguda na sala de emergência, descrevendo uma estratégia apropriada para o seu manejo. São consideradas as seguintes etapas: diagnóstico, avaliação da gravidade, tratamento farmacológico, avaliação das complicações e decisão sobre onde se realizará o tratamento adicional. Espera-se que estas recomendações contribuam para que o médico clínico tome a decisão apropriada na primeira hora do manejo da asma aguda.

Improved outcomes in patients with acute allergic syndromes who are treated with combined H1 and H2 antagonists

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Although the addition of H(2) blockers to H(1) antagonists has been promoted for use in anaphylaxis, there have been no large studies establishing the advantage of this approach in treating acute allergic syndromes. In this study we tested the hypothesis that combined H(1) and H(2) blockage results in improved outcomes in patients treated for acute allergic syndromes compared with treatment with H(1) blockade alone.

METHODS

In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, 91 adult patients with acute allergic syndromes were treated with either 50 mg of diphenhydramine and saline solution (control group) or with 50 mg of diphenhydramine and 50 mg of ranitidine (active group). These patients were treated with parenteral administration. Patients were recruited from an emergency department at an urban academic medical center. The primary endpoints were resolution of urticaria, angioedema, or erythema at 2 hours after protocol treatment. Areas of cutaneous involvement, heart rates, blood pressures, respiratory findings, and symptom scores were also assessed at baseline, 1 hour, and 2 hours.

RESULTS

There were significantly more patients without urticaria at 2 hours among the patients in the active group compared with those in the control group. Both groups had similar proportions of urticaria at baseline. Logistic regression models to predict resolution of urticaria, which accounted for baseline urticarial involvement, showed odds ratios in favor of the active group treatment. Similar findings were observed when the absence of both urticaria and angioedema was considered as the dependent variable. There was not a significant difference between the 2 groups with regard to the absence of erythema or angioedema (irrespective of the presence of urticaria) at 2 hours. Blood pressure and symptoms did not show differences between the 2 groups over time. Lower heart rates were observed 1 hour after treatment in the active treatment group (mean reduction 10 beats/min) compared with those found in the placebo group (mean reduction 6 beats/min).

CONCLUSION

These data show that adding H(2) blockers to H(1) antagonists results in additional improvement of certain cutaneous outcomes for patients presenting with acute allergic syndromes. These findings favor the recommendation for using combined H(1) and H(2) antihistamines in acute allergic syndromes.

New medications for asthma

The therapy for chronic stable asthma and acute asthma exacerbations continues to evolve as the pathogenesis of asthma becomes better understood. Although the role of many standard therapies for asthma is well established, some carry significant side effects. The newer anti-inflammatory medications have demonstrated both therapeutic benefit as well as reassuring safety profiles. The challenge of the future is to incorporate the newer medications described, as well as those still being examined, into a treatment regimen that can deliver maximal therapeutic benefit with the lowest possible incidence of side effects.

A comparison of inhaled fluticasone and oral prednisone for children with severe acute asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled corticosteroids are effective in the treatment of children with asthma. It is uncertain how inhaled corticosteroids compare with oral corticosteroids in the management of severe acute disease.

METHODS

We performed a double-blind, randomized trial involving 100 children five years of age or older who had severe acute asthma (indicated by a forced expiratory volume in one second [FEV1] that was less than 60 percent of the predicted value) and in whom the results could be evaluated. All were treated with an aggressive bronchodilator regimen and received one dose of either 2 mg of inhaled fluticasone through a metered-dose inhaler with a spacer or 2 mg of oral prednisone per kilogram of body weight. They were assessed hourly for up to four hours.

RESULTS

The mean (+/-SD) base-line FEV1 as a percentage of the predicted value was 46.3+/-12.5 in the fluticasone group (51 subjects) and 43.9+/-9.9 in the prednisone group (49 subjects). The FEV1 increased by a mean of 9.4+/-12.5 percentage points in the fluticasone group and by 18.9+/-9.8 percentage points in the prednisone group four hours after therapy (P< 0.001). None of the children in the prednisone group had a reduction in FEV1 as a percentage of the predicted value from base line to four hours, as compared with 25 percent of those in the fluticasone group (P<0.001). Sixteen (31 percent) of the children treated with fluticasone were hospitalized, as compared with five (10 percent) of those treated with prednisone (P=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Children with severe acute asthma should be treated with oral prednisone and not with inhaled fluticasone or a similar inhaled corticosteroid.

Treatment of acute asthma. A new look at the old and at the new

beta-Agonists remain the mainstay of therapy for acute asthma and, for most patients, standard doses are acceptable. Although the onset of action of systemic steroids is still not clear, steroids promote recovery and should be given to patients with acute illness. Intravenous magnesium sulfate appears to improve pulmonary function in the most severely ill patients but is not useful in patients with more moderate episodes. Ipratropium bromide is a weak bronchodilator that still needs to be tested as an adjunct to standard treatment regimens before its role in adults with asthma can be determined; given its ease of use and favorable safety profile it could be considered for patients with more severe acute illness. Aminophylline has not been found by most studies to improve outcomes and the narrow therapeutic range and unfavorable safety profile relegate it to a last-line agent or no use at all. Helium-oxygen mixtures currently have no role in moderately ill patients but have a theoretical advantage as a temporizing measure in severely ill patients. Drugs used in the management of chronic asthma, such as inhaled steroids and leukotriene-modifying agents, are making their way into the acute treatment arena, and other newly developed specific mediator inhibitors or blockers deserve attention. The use of isomers of beta-agonists is another area that is attracting attention and study. Systemic steroids are used to prevent relapse after emergency department discharge and the addition of other agents such as leukotriene-modifying agents or inhaled steroids may further prevent the need for urgent visits or hospitalization. The search for optimal treatment strategies for acutely ill patients is challenging and exciting and, with more attention and resources being devoted to this area, newer treatments will be found that will eventually have a greater impact on the high morbidity associated with acute asthma.

Management of respiratory failure in patients with asthma

The goal of management of patients with respiratory failure is to restore them to a state of quiet breathing, without complication. This goal is often achieved by pharmacotherapy alone. Inhaled albuterol sulfate, oxygen, and systemic corticosteroids are mainstays of acute care drug management, whereas other data support the use of inhaled steroids, ipratropium bromide, magnesium sulfate, theophylline, and heliox. Assisted ventilation by face mask or endotracheal tube may be required in refractory patients. In intubated patients, a ventilatory strategy that prolongs exhalation time and accepts hypercapnia minimizes lung hyperinflation and generally results in a good outcome. Acute asthma often represents failure of outpatient management; key aspects of the outpatient program should be addressed in the acute care setting to help prevent recurrent attacks.

Early emergency department treatment of acute asthma with systemic corticosteroids

BACKGROUND

The airway edema and secretions associated with acute asthma are most effectively treated with anti-inflammatories such as corticosteroids delivered by inhaled, oral, intravenous or intra-muscular routes. There is an unresolved debate about the use of systemic corticorticoids in the early treatment of acute asthma for emergency department patients.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefit of treating patients with acute asthma with systemic corticosteroids within an hour of presenting to the emergency department (ED).

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised controlled trials were identified from the Cochrane Airways Group Asthma Register. Primary authors and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies. Bibliographies from included studies and known reviews were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Studies were included if patients presenting to the ED with acute asthma were treated with IV/IM or oral corticosteroids (CS) vs. placebo within 1 hour of arrival and either admission rate or pulmonary function results were reported.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial selection, data extraction and quality assessment were carried out independently by two reviewers, and confirmed with corresponding authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve studies involving 863 patients (435 corticosteroids; 428 placebo) were included. Early use of CS for acute asthma in the ED significantly reduced admission rates (N = 11; pooled OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.78). This would correspond with a number needed to treat of 8 (95% CI: 5 to 21). This benefit was more pronounced for those not receiving systemic CS prior to ED presentation (N = 7; OR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.70) and those with more severe asthma (N = 7; OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0. 59). Oral CS therapy in children was particularly effective (N = 3; OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.53); no trials in adults used the oral route. Side effects were not significantly different between corticosteroid treatments and placebo.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Use of corticosteroids within 1 hour of presentation to an ED significantly reduces the need for hospital admission in patients with acute asthma. Benefits appear greatest in patients with more severe asthma, and those not currently receiving steroids. Children appear to respond well to oral steroids.

Evaluation of a new EMS asthma protocol in New York City: a preliminary report

BACKGROUND

In July 1996, the New York City (NYC) regional EMS implemented a new protocol whereby EMS personnel in the prehospital setting could administer 125 mg of intravenous methyl prednisolone to asthma patients as one of their medical options following telephone consultation with a medical control physician.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether this protocol had any effect on hospital admission rates or the emergency department (ED) length of stay.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review focused on the 219 (of 603 total) patients who arrived to the ED by ambulance over a two-year period whose ED diagnosis was asthma. There were 81 patient encounters in year 1, and 138 in year 2. Eleven of the year 2 group received prehospital steroids. The study took place at an urban 911 receiving, Level 2 ED.

RESULTS

Of the group who received prehospital steroids, none resulted in hospital admission. Due to the small sample size in the steroid-receiving group, the differences in these admission rates are not yet significant. No differences were detected in the ED length of stay between the two patient groups (157 vs. 160 minutes in year 2, p = 0.9).

CONCLUSION

The differences in admission rates suggested by this study suggest a simple yet potentially powerful tool for improving patient outcome in the treatment of asthma.