Is There a Role for Systemic Corticosteroids in the Management of Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease?

COPD, encompassing both chronic bronchitis and emphysema, usually results from exposure to tobacco smoke. Smoking causes infiltration of the airways with leukocytes, an imbalance between proteases and their naturally occurring inhibitors and local cytokine secretion in the lung, which leads to airway inflammation and alveolar destruction. Corticosteroids have a range of anti-inflammatory actions, particularly inhibition of cytokine secretion, which suggests that they may be effective in COPD. However, data from the highest quality studies available do not show any evidence of significant improvement in symptoms of patients with COPD treated with systemic corticosteroids.A meta-analysis found that about 10% of patients with stable COPD showed an improvement in lung function following treatment with short-term systemic corticosteroids compared with placebo. Exercise capacity in patients with COPD was evaluated in four studies, only one of which found a significant improvement with oral corticosteroids compared with placebo. Long-term systemic corticosteroid treatment in patients with stable COPD has not been found to alter the rate of decline in FEV(1). Although systemic corticosteroids are associated with a range of adverse effects, the data do not allow precise quantification of their contribution to morbidity. However, studies show an increased risk of osteoporosis in COPD. Recent studies have also found an association between oral corticosteroid administration and mortality in patients with stable COPD, but it is not clear if this is a cause and effect relationship. Current data do not support long-term administration of systemic corticosteroids to all patients with stable COPD. Results of studies suggest that short-term oral corticosteroid administration may identify a sub-population of patients with COPD who may benefit through a reduction in the decline in FEV(1) and better control of symptoms by long-term administration of inhaled corticosteroids; these findings need to be tested by further research.

The need to reform our assessment of evidence from clinical trials: a commentary

The ideology of evidence-based medicine (EBM) has dramatically altered the way we think, conceptualize, philosophize and practice medicine. One of its major pillars is the appraisal and classification of evidence. Although important and beneficial, this process currently lacks detail and is in need of reform. In particular, it largely focuses on three key dimensions (design, [type I] alpha error and beta [type II] error) to grade the quality of evidence and often omits other crucial aspects of evidence such as biological plausibility, reproducibility, generalizability, temporality, consistency and coherence. It also over-values the randomized trial and meta-analytical techniques, discounts the biasing effect of single centre execution and gives insufficient weight to large and detailed observational studies. Unless these aspects are progressively included into systems for grading, evaluating and classifying evidence and duly empirically assessed (according to the EBM paradigm), the EBM process and movement will remain open to criticism of being more evidence-biased than evidence-based."All scientific work is incomplete--whether it be observational or experimental. All scientific work is liable to be upset or modified by advancing knowledge. That does not confer upon us a freedom to ignore the knowledge we already have, or to postpone the action that it appears to demand at a given time". (Sir Bradford Austin Hill 1).

Unruptured intracranial aneurysms: natural history and management decisions

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) carries a grim prognosis, with high mortality and morbidity rates. The mortality rate in the first 30 days postrupture is estimated to be in the range of 40 to 50%, and almost half of the survivors will be left with a neurological deficit. Unlike patients with aneurysmal SAH, those with unruptured intracranial aneurysms usually experience no neurological deficit, and their treatment is prophylactic, aiming to reduce the risk of future bleeding and its consequences. The risk of rupture therefore assumes special importance when making decisions regarding which patient or aneurysm to treat.

In previous reports the risk of bleeding for unruptured aneurysms has been stated as approximately 2% per year. The retrospective part of the International Study of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (ISUIA) reported very low annual bleeding rates (0.05–1%) and high surgical morbidity and mortality rates (8–18%), prompting discussion in which the benefits of prophylactic treatment in the majority of these lesions were questioned. Prospective data from the second part of the ISUIA recently included rupture rates ranging from 0 to 10% per year. The aim of this paper was to review the evidence that is currently available for neurosurgeons to use when making decisions regarding patients who would benefit from treatment of an unruptured intracranial aneurysm.

Neurological, neuropsychological, and psychosocial outcome following treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a review and commentary

Thirty studies published between 1977 and 2001 that focus on outcome following unruptured intracranial aneurysm (UIA) treatment are reviewed. Although findings from these studies suggest outcome from UIA treatment is reasonably good (between 5% and 25% morbidity and between 0-7% mortality), many of the complex issues associated with the treatment of UIAs remain controversial. Most of the studies reviewed address outcome in terms of mortality and neurological morbidity. Very few studies exist which include measures of outcome such as cognitive status, psychosocial functioning and quality of life. Given that patients facing treatment tend to be healthy middle-aged adults with many years of active working and social life ahead of them, it is important to take into account the long-term consequences of either harboring an UIA, or having it treated. The small number of studies that include cognitive, psychosocial and quality of life outcomes are reviewed in some detail and suggestions made for improving future UIA outcome research.

Clinical outcomes in reduction mammaplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies

This systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken to determine whether reduction mammaplasty improves measurable outcomes in women with breast hypertrophy. A systematic review of the literature in 5 languages from 1985 until March 1999 was performed, and data were compared for meta-analysis. Eligible studies were both experimental and observational and involved women with preoperative physical and/or psychosocial signs and symptoms who underwent reduction mammaplasty for breast hypertrophy. Outcomes assessed were postoperative physical signs and symptoms such as shoulder pain, shoulder (bra strap) grooving, and quality-of-life domains, such as physical and psychological functioning, and were expressed primarily as risk differences (RDs). Twenty-nine studies of 4173 patients met all eligibility criteria. Reduction mammaplasty was associated with a statistically significant improvement in physical signs and symptoms involving shoulder pain (RD, 0.71 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.62-0.80]); shoulder grooving (RD, 0.69 [95% CI, 0.60-0.78]); upper/lower back pain (RD, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.48-0.70]); neck pain (RD, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.37-0.64]); intertrigo (RD, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.34-0.54]); breast pain (RD, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.17-0.55]); headache (RD, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.11-0.46]); and pain/numbness in the hands (RD, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.04-0.18]). The quality-of-life parameter of physical functioning was also statistically significant (RD, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.44-0.71]), while psychological functioning was not significant (RD, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.00-1.00]). The evidence suggests that women undergoing reduction mammaplasty for breast hypertrophy have significant postoperative improvement in preoperative signs and symptoms, quality of life, or both.