Randomized clinical trial of intramuscular vs oral methylprednisolone in the treatment of asthma exacerbations following discharge from an emergency department

The effectiveness and pharmacoeconomic study of using different corticosteroids in the treatment of hypersensitivity pneumonitis

PURPOSE

Interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are caused by inflammation and/or fibrosis of alveolar walls resulting in impaired gas exchange. Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is the third most common type of ILDs. Corticosteroids are the mainstay treatment for HP. The use of intramuscular (IM) betamethasone or intravenous (IV) dexamethasone as weekly pulse doses has shown higher benefit than daily oral prednisolone for HP patients. The aim of this study is to directly compare different corticosteroids in terms of effectiveness and in monetary values and perform an economic evaluation.

METHODS

One hundred and seven patients were tested for pulmonary function tests (PFTs) and inflammatory markers to assess the treatment effectiveness. A cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was performed. ICERs between 3 treatment groups were calculated.

RESULTS

Post treatment, Krebs von den Lungen-6 (KL-6) levels significantly improved in betamethasone group from 723.22 ± 218.18 U/ml to 554.48 ± 129.69 U/ml (p = 0.001). A significant improvement in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) occurred in the dexamethasone group from 56.12 ± 27.97 mm to 30.06 ± 16.04 mm (p = 0.048). A significant improvement in forced expiratory volume (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and six-minute walk distance (6MWD) was observed within the three treatment groups. A significant improvement in oxygen desaturation percentage (SpO2) occurred within dexamethasone and betamethasone groups. Betamethasone and dexamethasone were found more cost-effective than prednisolone as their ICERs fell in quadrant C. Furthermore, ICER between betamethasone and dexamethasone was performed; a small difference in cost was found compared to the higher benefit of betamethasone.

CONCLUSION

Betamethasone and dexamethasone were found to be more effective than prednisolone in improving the inflammatory reaction and the clinical features of HP patients. Betamethasone was found to be the best intervention in terms of cost against the effect.

GEMA 5.3. Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma

The Spanish Guideline on the Management of Asthma, better known by its acronym in Spanish GEMA, has been available for more than 20 years. Twenty-one scientific societies or related groups both from Spain and internationally have participated in the preparation and development of the updated edition of GEMA, which in fact has been currently positioned as the reference guide on asthma in the Spanish language worldwide. Its objective is to prevent and improve the clinical situation of people with asthma by increasing the knowledge of healthcare professionals involved in their care. Its purpose is to convert scientific evidence into simple and easy-to-follow practical recommendations. Therefore, it is not a monograph that brings together all the scientific knowledge about the disease, but rather a brief document with the essentials, designed to be applied quickly in routine clinical practice. The guidelines are necessarily multidisciplinary, developed to be useful and an indispensable tool for physicians of different specialties, as well as nurses and pharmacists. Probably the most outstanding aspects of the guide are the recommendations to: establish the diagnosis of asthma using a sequential algorithm based on objective diagnostic tests; the follow-up of patients, preferably based on the strategy of achieving and maintaining control of the disease; treatment according to the level of severity of asthma, using six steps from least to greatest need of pharmaceutical drugs, and the treatment algorithm for the indication of biologics in patients with severe uncontrolled asthma based on phenotypes. And now, in addition to that, there is a novelty for easy use and follow-up through a computer application based on the chatbot-type conversational artificial intelligence (ia-GEMA).

Challenge of immune-mediated adverse reactions in the emergency department

Multiple drugs of a new class of cancer treatments called immune checkpoint inhibitors, which work by enabling the immune system to attack tumour cells, have been approved for a variety of indications in recent years. Immune checkpoints, such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen-4 and programmed death-1, are part of the normal immune system and regulate immune activation. Treatment with inhibitors of these checkpoints can significantly improve response rates, progression-free survival and overall survival of patients with cancer; it can also result in adverse reactions that present similarly to other conditions. These immune-mediated adverse reactions (IMARs) are most commonly gastrointestinal, respiratory, endocrine or dermatologic. Although patients’ presentations may appear similar to other types of cancer therapy, the underlying causes, and consequently their management, may differ. Prompt recognition is critical because, with appropriate management, most IMARs resolve and patients can continue receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. Rarely, these IMARs may be life-threatening and escape detection from the usual evaluations in the emergency environment. Given the unusual spectrum and mechanism of IMARs arising from immune checkpoint inhibitors, emergency departmentED staff require a clear understanding of the evaluation of IMARs to enable them to appropriately assess and treat these patients. Treatment of IMARs, most often with high-dose steroids, differs from chemotherapy-related adverse events and when possible should be coordinated with the treating oncologist. This review summarises the ED presentation and management of IMARs arising from immune checkpoint inhibitors and includes recommendations for tools and resources for ED healthcare professionals.

Evaluating the effectiveness of systemic corticosteroids to mitigate relapse in children assessed and treated for acute asthma: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to explore the effectiveness of various systemic corticosteroid (SCS) regimens to mitigate relapse in children with asthma discharged from an acute care setting.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, Global Health, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, EMB ALL, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Proquest Dissertations and Theses Global, and LILACS were searched using controlled vocabulary and key words. Additional citations were searched via clinical trial registries, Google Scholar, bibliographies, a SCOPUS forward search of a sentinel paper, and hand searching conference abstracts.

STUDY SELECTION

No limitations based on language, publication status, or year of publication were applied. Two independent reviewers searched to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of SCS regimens to prevent relapse in children following treatment for acute asthma.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. In 3 studies comparing SCS to placebo, asthma relapse was significantly reduced (RR = 0.10; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.77; I² = 0%). A network analysis identified a significant reduction in relapse in children treated with intramuscular corticosteroids (OR = 0.038; 95% CrI: 0.001, 0.397), short-course oral prednisone (OR = 0.054; 95% CrI: 0.002, 0.451), and oral dexamethasone (OR = 0.071; 95% CrI: 0.002, 0.733) compared to placebo.

CONCLUSION

This review found evidence that SCS reduces relapse in children following treatment for acute asthma, albeit based on a limited number of studies. Additional studies are required to assess the differential effect of SCS doses and treatment duration to prevent relapse in children following discharge for acute asthma.

Intramuscular versus oral corticosteroids to reduce relapses following discharge from the emergency department for acute asthma

BACKGROUND

Acute asthma is a common cause of presentations to acute care centres, such as the emergency department (ED), and while the majority of patients can be discharged, relapse requiring additional medical care is common. Systemic corticosteroids are a major part in the treatment of moderate to severe acute asthma; however, there is no clear evidence regarding the most effective route of administration for improving outcomes in patients discharged from acute care.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effectiveness and safety of a single dose of intramuscular (IM) corticosteroids provided prior to discharge compared to a short course of oral corticosteroids in the treatment of acute asthma patients discharged from an ED or equivalent acute care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Airways Group conducted searches of the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials, most recently on 14 March 2018. In addition in April 2017 we completed an extensive search of nine electronic databases including Medline, Embase, EBM ALL, Global Health, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, CINAHL, SCOPUS, Proquest Dissertations and Theses Global, and LILACS. Furthermore, we searched the grey literature to identify any additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials if they compared the effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) versus oral corticosteroids to treat paediatric or adult patients presenting with acute asthma to an ED or equivalent acute care setting. Two independent reviewers assessed study eligibility and study quality. We resolved disagreements via a third party and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. We assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated individual and pooled statistics as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. We reported continuous outcomes using mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs using a random-effects model. We reported heterogeneity using I² and Cochran Q statistics. We used standard procedures recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine studies involving 804 participants (IM = 402 participants; oral = 402 participants) met our review inclusion criteria. Four studies enrolled children (n = 245 participants), while five studies enrolled adults (n = 559 participants). All of the studies recruited participants presenting to an ED, except one study which recruited participants attending a primary care clinic. All of the paediatric studies compared intramuscular (IM) dexamethasone to oral prednisone/prednisolone. In the adult studies, the IM corticosteroid provided ranged from methylprednisolone, betamethasone, dexamethasone, or triamcinolone, while the regimen of oral corticosteroids provided consisted of prednisone, methylprednisolone, or dexamethasone. Only five studies were placebo controlled. For the purposes of this review, we did not take corticosteroid dose equivalency into account in the analysis. The most common co-intervention provided to participants during the acute care visit included short-acting beta₂-agonists (SABA), methylxanthines, and ipratropium bromide. In some instances, some studies reported providing some participants with supplemental oral or IV corticosteroids during their stay in the ED. Co-interventions provided to participants at discharge consisted primarily of SABA, methylxanthine, long-acting beta₂-agonists (LABA), and ipratropium bromide. The risk of bias of the included studies ranged from unclear to high across various domains. The primary outcome of interest was relapse to additional care defined as an unscheduled visit to a health practitioner for worsening asthma symptoms, or requiring subsequent treatment with corticosteroids which may have occurred at any time point after discharge from the ED.We found intramuscular and oral corticosteroids to be similarly effective in reducing the risk for relapse (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 9 studies, 804 participants; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). We found no subgroup differences in relapse rates between paediatric and adult participants (P = 0.71), relapse occurring within or after 10 days post-discharge (P = 0.22), or participants with mild/moderate or severe exacerbations (P = 0.35). While we found no statistical difference between participants receiving IM versus oral corticosteroids regarding the risk for adverse events (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.07; 5 studies, 404 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), an estimated 50 fewer patients per 1000 receiving IM corticosteroids reported experiencing adverse events (95% from 106 fewer to 21 more). We found inconsistent reporting of specific adverse events across the studies. There were no differences in the frequency of specific adverse events including nausea and vomiting, pain, swelling, redness, insomnia, or personality changes. We did not seek additional adverse events data.Participants receiving IM corticosteroids or oral corticosteroids both reported decreases in peak expiratory flow (MD -7.78 L/min, 95% CI -38.83 L/min to 23.28 L/min; 4 studies, 272 participants; I² = 33%; moderate-quality evidence), similar symptom persistence (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.20; 3 studies, 80 participants; I² = 44%; low-quality evidence), and 24-hour beta-agonist use (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.37; 2 studies, 48 participants; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to identify whether IM corticosteroids are more effective in reducing relapse compared to oral corticosteroids among children or adults discharged from an ED or equivalent acute care setting for acute asthma. While we found no statistical differences, patients receiving IM corticosteroids reported fewer adverse events. Additional studies comparing the effectiveness of IM versus oral corticosteroids could provide further evidence clarity. Furthermore, there is a need for studies comparing different IM corticosteroids (e.g. IM dexamethasone versus IM methylprednisone) and different oral corticosteroids (e.g. oral dexamethasone versus oral prednisone), with consideration for dosing and pharmacokinetic properties, to better identify the optimal IM or oral corticosteroid regimens to improve patient outcomes. Other factors, such as patient preference and potential issues with adherence, may dictate practitioner prescribing.

Outpatient Management for Acute Exacerbations of Obstructive Lung Diseases

Primary care providers tasked with treating acute exacerbations of asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease must be able to recognize exacerbation of symptoms and triage patients based on exacerbation severity to the appropriate level of care. Early treatment with bronchodilators and corticosteroids should be followed by repeated assessments of treatment efficacy. Primary care providers should also provide symptom-guided action plans to empower patients to manage their disease.

Prioritizing Systemic Corticosteroid Treatments to Mitigate Relapse in Adults With Acute Asthma: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

While systemic corticosteroids (SCS) are widely used to prevent relapse in adults with acute asthma discharged from the emergency department, the most effective route of administration is unclear. The objective of this review was to examine the effectiveness of SCS in adults and to identify the most effective route of SCS to preventing relapse.

METHODS

A search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials comparing the effectiveness of intramuscular (IM) or oral (PO) short-course or long-course corticosteroids to prevent relapse in adults with acute asthma. Two independent reviewers judged study relevance, inclusion, and risk of bias. Pooled statistics were calculated as risk ratios (RR) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and credibility intervals (CrI) using a random-effects model. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed for indirect comparisons of SCS to placebo. Probability of best (PB) analysis was reported for comparisons between the routes of administration.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies of moderate quality were included. Four studies compared SCS to placebo, in which SCS significantly reduced relapse (RR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.25 to 0.74). In the network meta-analysis, a significant reduction in relapse within 10 days of discharge was found in adults receiving IM (OR = 0.21; 95% CrI = 0.05 to 0.73) and PO long-course (OR = 0.31; 95% CrI = 0.09 to 0.95) corticosteroids. Relapse rates between PO short-course corticosteroids and placebo were not statistically significantly different (OR = 0.37; 95% CrI = 0.04 to 3.38). PB analysis favored IM corticosteroids (62%) followed by PO short-course (20.3%) and PO long-course (14.1%) corticosteroids.

CONCLUSIONS

The network analysis identified IM corticosteroids and PO long-course corticosteroids as the most effective strategies to prevent relapse among adults with acute asthma, compared to PO short-course corticosteroids. The lack of significant findings with PO short-course corticosteroids is likely due to the paucity of research. Further comparative studies are required to determine the safety and effectiveness of briefer PO SCS treatment options in adults.

Different oral corticosteroid regimens for acute asthma

BACKGROUND

Asthma is a common long-term breathing condition that affects approximately 300 million people worldwide. People with asthma may experience short-term worsening of their asthma symptoms; these episodes are often known as 'exacerbations', 'flare-ups', 'attacks' or 'acute asthma'. Oral steroids, which have a potent anti-inflammatory effect, are recommended for all but the most mild asthma exacerbations; they should be initiated promptly. The most often prescribed oral steroids are prednisolone and dexamethasone, but current guidelines on dosing vary between countries, and often among different guideline producers within the same country. Despite their proven efficacy, use of steroids needs to be balanced against their potential to cause important adverse events. Evidence is somewhat limited regarding optimal dosing of oral steroids for asthma exacerbations to maximise recovery while minimising potential side effects, which is the topic of this review.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of any dose or duration of oral steroids versus any other dose or duration of oral steroids for adults and children with an asthma exacerbation.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (CAGR), ClinicalTrials.gov (www.ClinicalTrials.gov), the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (www.who.int/ictrp/en/) and reference lists of all primary studies and review articles. This search was up to date as of April 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included parallel randomised controlled trials (RCTs), irrespective of blinding or duration, that evaluated one dose or duration of oral steroid versus any other dose or duration, for management of asthma exacerbations. We included studies involving both adults and children with asthma of any severity, in which investigators analysed adults and children separately. We allowed any other co-intervention in the management of an asthma exacerbation, provided it was not part of the randomised treatment. We included studies reported as full text, those published as abstract only and unpublished data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results for included trials, extracted numerical data and assessed risk of bias; all data were cross-checked for accuracy. We resolved disagreements by discussion with the third review author or with an external advisor.We analysed dichotomous data as odds ratios (ORs) or risk differences (RDs) using study participants as the unit of analysis; we analysed continuous data as mean differences (MDs). We used a random-effects model, and we carried out a fixed-effect analysis if we detected statistical heterogeneity. We rated all outcomes using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system and presented results in 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 studies that randomised a total of 2438 participants - both adults and children - and performed comparisons of interest. Included studies assessed higher versus lower doses of prednisolone (n = 4); longer versus shorter courses of prednisolone (n = 3) or dexamethasone (n = 1); tapered versus non-tapered courses of prednisolone (n = 4); and prednisolone versus dexamethasone (n = 6). Follow-up duration ranged from seven days to six months. The smallest study randomised just 15 participants, and the largest 638 (median 93). The varied interventions and outcomes reported limited the number of meaningful meta-analyses that we could perform.For two of our primary outcomes - hospital admission and serious adverse events - events were too infrequent to permit conclusions about the superiority of one treatment over the other, or their equivalence. Researchers in the included studies reported asthma symptoms in different ways and rarely used validated scales, again limiting our conclusions. Secondary outcome meta-analysis was similarly hampered by heterogeneity among interventions and outcome measures used. Overall, we found no convincing evidence of differences in outcomes between a higher dose or longer course and a lower dose or shorter course of prednisolone or dexamethasone, or between prednisolone and dexamethasone.Included studies were generally of reasonable methodological quality. Review authors assessed most outcomes in the review as having low or very low quality, meaning we are not confident in the effect estimates. The predominant reason for downgrading was imprecision, but indirectness and risk of bias also reduced our confidence in some estimates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence is not strong enough to reveal whether shorter or lower-dose regimens are generally less effective than longer or higher-dose regimens, or indeed that the latter are associated with more adverse events. Any changes recommended for current practice should be supported by data from larger, well-designed trials. Varied study design and outcome measures limited the number of meta-analyses that we could perform. Greater emphasis on palatability and on whether some regimens might be easier to adhere to than others could better inform clinical decisions for individual patients.

A Randomized Controlled Noninferiority Trial of Single Dose of Oral Dexamethasone Versus 5 Days of Oral Prednisone in Acute Adult Asthma

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Oral dexamethasone demonstrates bioavailability similar to that of oral prednisone but has a longer half-life. We evaluate whether a single dose of oral dexamethasone plus 4 days of placebo is not inferior to 5 days of oral prednisone in treatment of adults with mild to moderate asthma exacerbations to prevent relapse defined as an unscheduled return visit for additional treatment for persistent or worsening asthma within 14 days.

METHODS

Adult emergency department patients (aged 18 to 55 years) were randomized to receive either a single dose of 12 mg of oral dexamethasone with 4 days of placebo or a 5-day course of oral prednisone 60 mg a day. Outcomes including relapse were assessed by a follow-up telephone interview at 2 weeks.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-three dexamethasone and 203 prednisone subjects completed the study regimen and telephone follow-up. The dexamethasone group by a small margin surpassed the preset 8% difference between groups for noninferiority in relapse rates within 14 days (12.1% versus 9.8%; difference 2.3%; 95% confidence interval -4.1% to 8.6%). Subjects in the 2 groups had similar rates of hospitalization for their relapse visit (dexamethasone 3.4% versus prednisone 2.9%; difference 0.5%; 95% confidence interval -4.1% to 3.1%). Adverse effect rates were generally the same in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

A single dose of oral dexamethasone did not demonstrate noninferiority to prednisone for 5 days by a very small margin for treatment of adults with mild to moderate asthma exacerbations. Enhanced compliance and convenience may support the use of dexamethasone regardless.

Pharmacotherapy of critical asthma syndrome: current and emerging therapies

The critical asthma syndrome (CAS) encompasses the most severe, persistent, refractory asthma patients for the clinician to manage. Personalized pharmacotherapy is necessary to prevent the next acute severe asthma exacerbation, not just the control of symptoms. The 2007 National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Expert Panel 3 provides guidelines for the treatment of uncontrolled asthma. The patient's response to recommended pharmacotherapy is highly variable which risks poor asthma control leading to frequent exacerbations that can deteriorate into CAS. Controlling asthma symptoms and preventing acute exacerbations may be two separate clinical activities with their own unique demands. Clinicians must be prepared to use the entire spectrum of asthma medications available but must concurrently be aware of potential drug toxicities some of which can paradoxically worsen asthma control. Medications normally prescribed for COPD can potentially be useful in the CAS patient, particularly those with asthma-COPD overlap syndrome. Immunomodulation with drugs like omalizumab in IgE-mediated asthma syndromes is one important approach. New and emerging drugs address unique aspects of airway inflammation and biology but at a significant financial cost. The pharmacology and toxicities of the agents that may be used in the treatment of CAS to control asthma symptoms and prevent severe exacerbations are reviewed.

The acute management of asthma

Patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) or clinic with acute exacerbation of asthma (AEA) can be very challenging varying in both severity and response to therapy. High-dose, frequent or continuous nebulized short-acting beta2 agonist (SABA) therapy that can be combined with a short-acting muscarinic antagonist (SAMA) is the backbone of treatment. When patients do not rapidly clinically respond to SABA/SAMA inhalation, the early use of oral or parenteral corticosteroids should be considered and has been shown to impact the immediate need for ICU admission or even the need for hospital admission. Adjunctive therapies such as the use of intravenous magnesium and helium/oxygen combination gas for inhalation and for driving a nebulizer to deliver a SABA and or SAMA should be considered and are best used early in the treatment plan if they are likely to impact the patients' clinical course. The use of other agents such as theophylline, leukotriene modifiers, inhaled corticosteroids, long-acting beta2 agonist, and long-acting muscarinic antagonist currently does not play a major role in the immediate treatment of AEA in the clinic or the ED but is an important therapeutic option for physicians to be aware of and to consider initiating at the time of discharge from clinic, hospital, or ED to reduce later clinical worsening and readmission to the ED and hospital. A comprehensive summary is provided of the currently available respiratory pharmaceuticals approved for asthma and other airway syndromes. Clinicians must be prepared to use the entire spectrum of medications available for the treatment of acute asthma exacerbations and the agents that should be initiated to prevent worsening or additional exacerbations. They need to be familiar with the major potential drug toxicities associated with their use.

The patient with asthma in the emergency department

Asthma is a highly prevalent disease that presents commonly to the emergency department (ED) in acute exacerbation. Recent asthma treatment guidelines have added content dedicated to the management of acute exacerbations. Effective management of an exacerbation requires rapid assessment of severity through physical examination, measurement of peak expiratory flow rate, and response to initial treatment. Most therapies are directed at alleviating bronchospasm and decreasing airway inflammation. While inhaled short-acting beta-agonists, systemic corticosteroids, and supplemental oxygen are the initial and often only therapies required for patients with mild moderate exacerbations, high-dose beta agonists and inhaled anti-cholinergics should also be given to patients with severe exacerbations. Adjunctive therapy with intravenous magnesium and Heliox-driven nebulization of bronchodilators should be considered for patients presenting with severe and very severe exacerbations. Early recognition and appropriate management of respiratory failure are required to mitigate the risk of complications including death. Disposition should be determined based on serial assessments of the response to therapy over the first 4 h in the ED. Patients stable for discharge should receive medications, asthma education including a written asthma action plan, and should have follow-up scheduled for them by ED staff. Rapid implementation of evidence-based, multi-disciplinary care is required to ensure the best possible outcomes for this potentially treatable disease.

Asthma diagnosis and management

Asthma is a chronic inflammatory airway disease that is commonly seen in the emergency department (ED). This article provides an evidence-based review of diagnosis and management of asthma. Early recognition of asthma exacerbations and initiation of treatment are essential. Treatment is dictated by the severity of the exacerbation. Treatment involves bronchodilators and corticosteroids. Other treatment modalities including magnesium, heliox, and noninvasive ventilator support are discussed. Safe disposition from the ED can be considered after stabilization of the exacerbation, response to treatment and attaining peak flow measures.

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.

Treatment strategies for reducing asthma-related emergency department visits

Acute asthma exacerbations reflect inadequate long-term disease control. Treatment to control acute asthma exacerbations includes: 1) rapid reversal of airflow obstruction with bronchodilators and systemic corticosteroids and reversing hypoxemia with oxygen in the emergency department (ED); 2) preventing early relapse by prescribing beta(2) agonists and oral corticosteroids at discharge and ensuring patients have an adequate supply of their other asthma medications; and 3) preventing future asthma exacerbations and ED visits through effective treatment in primary care. This article discusses each treatment and reviews the role of emergency physicians in treating patients to reverse airflow obstruction and prevent early relapse, future exacerbations, and ED visits by communicating the need for additional asthma control to patients' primary care physicians.

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.