-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2021Pulmonary rehabilitation is a proven, effective intervention for people with chronic respiratory diseases including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD),... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Pulmonary rehabilitation is a proven, effective intervention for people with chronic respiratory diseases including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease (ILD) and bronchiectasis. However, relatively few people attend or complete a program, due to factors including a lack of programs, issues associated with travel and transport, and other health issues. Traditionally, pulmonary rehabilitation is delivered in-person on an outpatient basis at a hospital or other healthcare facility (referred to as centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation). Newer, alternative modes of pulmonary rehabilitation delivery include home-based models and the use of telehealth. Telerehabilitation is the delivery of rehabilitation services at a distance, using information and communication technology. To date, there has not been a comprehensive assessment of the clinical efficacy or safety of telerehabilitation, or its ability to improve uptake and access to rehabilitation services, for people with chronic respiratory disease.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness and safety of telerehabilitation for people with chronic respiratory disease.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; six databases including MEDLINE and Embase; and three trials registries, up to 30 November 2020. We checked reference lists of all included studies for additional references, and handsearched relevant respiratory journals and meeting abstracts.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials of telerehabilitation for the delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation were eligible for inclusion. The telerehabilitation intervention was required to include exercise training, with at least 50% of the rehabilitation intervention being delivered by telerehabilitation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane. We assessed the risk of bias for all studies, and used the ROBINS-I tool to assess bias in non-randomised controlled clinical trials. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. Comparisons were telerehabilitation compared to traditional in-person (centre-based) pulmonary rehabilitation, and telerehabilitation compared to no rehabilitation. We analysed studies of telerehabilitation for maintenance rehabilitation separately from trials of telerehabilitation for initial primary pulmonary rehabilitation.
MAIN RESULTS
We included a total of 15 studies (32 reports) with 1904 participants, using five different models of telerehabilitation. Almost all (99%) participants had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Three studies were controlled clinical trials. For primary pulmonary rehabilitation, there was probably little or no difference between telerehabilitation and in-person pulmonary rehabilitation for exercise capacity measured as 6-Minute Walking Distance (6MWD) (mean difference (MD) 0.06 metres (m), 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.82 m to 10.94 m; 556 participants; four studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There may also be little or no difference for quality of life measured with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (MD -1.26, 95% CI -3.97 to 1.45; 274 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence), or for breathlessness on the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) dyspnoea domain score (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.40; 426 participants; three studies; low-certainty evidence). Participants were more likely to complete a program of telerehabilitation, with a 93% completion rate (95% CI 90% to 96%), compared to a 70% completion rate for in-person rehabilitation. When compared to no rehabilitation control, trials of primary telerehabilitation may increase exercise capacity on 6MWD (MD 22.17 m, 95% CI -38.89 m to 83.23 m; 94 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence) and may also increase 6MWD when delivered as maintenance rehabilitation (MD 78.1 m, 95% CI 49.6 m to 106.6 m; 209 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects of telerehabilitation were noted over and above any reported for in-person rehabilitation or no rehabilitation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests that primary pulmonary rehabilitation, or maintenance rehabilitation, delivered via telerehabilitation for people with chronic respiratory disease achieves outcomes similar to those of traditional centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation, with no safety issues identified. However, the certainty of the evidence provided by this review is limited by the small number of studies, of varying telerehabilitation models, with relatively few participants. Future research should consider the clinical effect of telerehabilitation for individuals with chronic respiratory diseases other than COPD, the duration of benefit of telerehabilitation beyond the period of the intervention, and the economic cost of telerehabilitation.
Topics: Bias; Chronic Disease; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic; Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Internet; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Patient Compliance; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration Disorders; Telephone; Telerehabilitation; Videoconferencing; Walk Test
PubMed: 33511633
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013040.pub2 -
JAMA Network Open Sep 2023Current rehabilitation guidelines for patients with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) are primarily based on expert opinions and observational data, and there is an urgent... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Current rehabilitation guidelines for patients with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) are primarily based on expert opinions and observational data, and there is an urgent need for evidence-based rehabilitation interventions to support patients with PCC.
OBJECTIVE
To synthesize the findings of existing studies that report on physical capacity (including functional exercise capacity, muscle function, dyspnea, and respiratory function) and quality of life outcomes following rehabilitation interventions in patients with PCC.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic electronic search was performed from January 2020 until February 2023, in MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and the Clinical Trials Registry. Key terms that were used to identify potentially relevant studies included long-covid, post-covid, sequelae, exercise therapy, rehabilitation, physical activity, physical therapy, and randomized controlled trial.
STUDY SELECTION
This study included randomized clinical trials that compared respiratory training and exercise-based rehabilitation interventions with either placebo, usual care, waiting list, or control in patients with PCC.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A pairwise bayesian random-effects meta-analysis was performed using vague prior distributions. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE system by 2 independent researchers.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was functional exercise capacity, measured at the closest postintervention time point by the 6-minute walking test. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, lower limb muscle function, dyspnea, respiratory function, and quality of life. All outcomes were defined a priori. Continuous outcomes were reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) and binary outcomes were summarized as odds ratios with 95% CrIs. The between-trial heterogeneity was quantified using the between-study variance, τ2, and 95% CrIs.
RESULTS
Of 1834 identified records, 1193 were screened, and 14 trials (1244 patients; 45% female participants; median [IQR] age, 50 [47 to 56] years) were included in the analyses. Rehabilitation interventions were associated with improvements in functional exercise capacity (SMD, -0.56; 95% CrI, -0.87 to -0.22) with moderate certainty in 7 trials (389 participants). These improvements had a 99% posterior probability of superiority when compared with current standard care. The value of τ2 (0.04; 95% CrI, 0.00 to 0.60) indicated low statistical heterogeneity. However, there was significant uncertainty and imprecision regarding the probability of experiencing exercise-induced adverse events (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% CrI, 0.32 to 9.94).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that rehabilitation interventions are associated with improvements in functional exercise capacity, dyspnea, and quality of life, with a high probability of improvement compared with the current standard care; the certainty of evidence was moderate for functional exercise capacity and quality of life and low for other outcomes. Given the uncertainty surrounding the safety outcomes, additional trials with enhanced monitoring of adverse events are necessary.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Quality of Life; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; Bayes Theorem; COVID-19; Dyspnea; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37725376
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.33838 -
Journal of Thoracic Disease Mar 2020Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive disease associated with significant dyspnea and limited exercise capacity. This systematic review aimed to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive disease associated with significant dyspnea and limited exercise capacity. This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence of exercise interventions during pulmonary rehabilitation that aim to improve exercise capacity, dyspnea, and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in IPF patients.
METHODS
Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, PubMed and PEDro from inception to January 2019 using search terms for: (I) participants: 'IPF or interstitial lung disease'; (II) interventions: 'aerobic training or resistance training or respiratory muscle training'; and (III) outcomes: 'exercise capacity or dyspnea or health-related quality of life'. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts to identify eligible studies. Methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist and meta-analyses were performed.
RESULTS
Of 1,677 articles identified, 14 were included (four randomized controlled trials and 10 prospective pre-post design studies) that examined 362 patients receiving training and 95 control subjects. Exercise capacity was measured with the 6-minute walk distance, peak oxygen consumption, peak work rate, or endurance time for constant work rate cycling, which increased after exercise [aerobic exercise; aerobic and breathing exercises; aerobic and inspiratory muscle training (IMT) exercises] compared to the control groups. Dyspnea scores improved after aerobic and breathing exercises. HRQL also improved after aerobic exercise training alone or combined with breathing exercises. Aerobic training alone or combined with IMT or breathing exercises improved exercise capacity.
CONCLUSIONS
Breathing exercises appears to complement exercise training towards improved dyspnea and HRQL in patients with IPF.
PubMed: 32274173
DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2019.12.27 -
Advances in Therapy Jan 2022This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on pulmonary function and exercise capacity in individuals with chronic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training on Pulmonary Function and Exercise Capacity in Individuals with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.
INTRODUCTION
This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on pulmonary function and exercise capacity in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
METHODS
Ten databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, CNKI, Wanfang, Weipu, and CBM) were searched for relevant articles published from inception to 30 June 2020. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a HIIT group with usual care or other training groups. Quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale, and the overall quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. The primary outcomes were peak VO and FEV% predicted, and the secondary outcomes were FEV/FVC, peak V, peak WR, 6MWD, dyspnea, health-related quality of life, and adverse event.
RESULTS
Twelve articles (689 patients) were included. HIIT was shown to have a positive effect on exercise capacity (peak WR, 6MWD), pulmonary function (FEV% pred, peak V), dyspnea, and quality of life. However, sensitivity analyses for dyspnea were unstable, and the result changed from positive to negative after removing one study (SMD = - 0.13, 95% CI [- 0.44, 0.17], P = 0.40).
CONCLUSIONS
HIIT could improve pulmonary function, exercise capacity, and quality of life but may not decrease dyspnea in patients with COPD. It can be recommended as a safe and effective exercise modality in rehabilitation programs. Given that the overall results were based on a limited number of studies with significant heterogeneity and some of the results were based on low GRADE rating evidence, more high-quality, larger sample size, multicenter, and long-term follow-up RCTs are needed to confirm the clinical efficacy of HIIT in patients with COPD.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42020165897.
Topics: Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; High-Intensity Interval Training; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34792785
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-021-01920-6 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2015Terminally ill people experience a variety of symptoms in the last hours and days of life, including delirium, agitation, anxiety, terminal restlessness, dyspnoea, pain,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Terminally ill people experience a variety of symptoms in the last hours and days of life, including delirium, agitation, anxiety, terminal restlessness, dyspnoea, pain, vomiting, and psychological and physical distress. In the terminal phase of life, these symptoms may become refractory, and unable to be controlled by supportive and palliative therapies specifically targeted to these symptoms. Palliative sedation therapy is one potential solution to providing relief from these refractory symptoms. Sedation in terminally ill people is intended to provide relief from refractory symptoms that are not controlled by other methods. Sedative drugs such as benzodiazepines are titrated to achieve the desired level of sedation; the level of sedation can be easily maintained and the effect is reversible.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the evidence for the benefit of palliative pharmacological sedation on quality of life, survival, and specific refractory symptoms in terminally ill adults during their last few days of life.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 11), MEDLINE (1946 to November 2014), and EMBASE (1974 to December 2014), using search terms representing the sedative drug names and classes, disease stage, and study designs.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, non-RCTs, and observational studies (e.g. before-and-after, interrupted-time-series) with quantitative outcomes. We excluded studies with only qualitative outcomes or that had no comparison (i.e. no control group or no within-group comparison) (e.g. single arm case series).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts of citations, and full text of potentially eligible studies. Two review authors independently carried out data extraction using standard data extraction forms. A third review author acted as arbiter for both stages. We carried out no meta-analyses due to insufficient data for pooling on any outcome; therefore, we reported outcomes narratively.
MAIN RESULTS
The searches resulted in 14 included studies, involving 4167 adults, of whom 1137 received palliative sedation. More than 95% of people had cancer. No studies were randomised or quasi-randomised. All were consecutive case series, with only three having prospective data collection. Risk of bias was high, due to lack of randomisation. No studies measured quality of life or participant well-being, which was the primary outcome of the review. Five studies measured symptom control, using four different methods, so pooling was not possible. The results demonstrated that despite sedation, delirium and dyspnoea were still troublesome symptoms in these people in the last few days of life. Control of other symptoms appeared to be similar in sedated and non-sedated people. Only one study measured unintended adverse effects of sedative drugs and found no major events; however, four of 70 participants appeared to have drug-induced delirium. The study noticed no respiratory suppression. Thirteen of the 14 studies measured survival time from admission or referral to death, and all demonstrated no statistically significant difference between sedated and non-sedated groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There was insufficient evidence about the efficacy of palliative sedation in terms of a person's quality of life or symptom control. There was evidence that palliative sedation did not hasten death, which has been a concern of physicians and families in prescribing this treatment. However, this evidence comes from low quality studies, so should be interpreted with caution. Further studies that specifically measure the efficacy and quality of life in sedated people, compared with non-sedated people, and quantify adverse effects are required.
Topics: Adult; Conscious Sedation; Deep Sedation; Humans; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Palliative Care; Selection Bias; Terminal Care; Terminally Ill
PubMed: 25879099
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010206.pub2 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Oct 2022To qualitatively synthesize and quantitatively evaluate the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) on dyspnea, lung functions, fatigue, exercise capacity, and quality... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effect of Pulmonary Rehabilitation Approaches on Dyspnea, Exercise Capacity, Fatigue, Lung Functions, and Quality of Life in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To qualitatively synthesize and quantitatively evaluate the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) on dyspnea, lung functions, fatigue, exercise capacity, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with COVID-19.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched from January 2020 to April 2022.
DATA SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of PR on dyspnea, lung functions, fatigue, exercise capacity, and QoL in patients with COVID-19.
DATA EXTRACTION
The mean difference (MD) and a 95% CI were estimated for all the outcome measures using random effect models. The following data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers: (1) first author; (2) publication year; (3) nationality; (4) number of patients included (5) comorbidities; (6) ventilatory support; (7) length of inpatient stay; (8) type of PR; (9) outcome measures; and (10) main findings. The risk of bias was evaluated using the cochrane risk of bias tool.
DATA SYNTHESIS
A total of 8 RCTs involving 449 participants were included in the review. PR was found to be significantly effective in improving dyspnea (5 studies, SMD -2.11 [95% CI, -2.96 to -1.27; P<.001]) and exercise capacity (MD 65.85 m [95% CI, 42.86 to 88.83; P<.001]) in patients with both acute and chronic COVID-19 with mild to severe symptoms, whereas fatigue (MD -2.42 [95% CI, -2.72 to -2.11, P<.05]) and lung functions (MD 0.26 L [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48, P<.05]) were significantly improved in acute COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms. The effect of PR on QoL was inconsistent across studies. PR was found to be safe and feasible for patients with COVID-19.
CONCLUSION
Evidence from studies indicates that PR program is superior to no intervention in improving dyspnea, exercise capacity, lung functions, and fatigue in patients with COVID-19. PR appears to be safe and beneficial for both acute and chronic COVID-19 patients.
Topics: COVID-19; Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Fatigue; Humans; Lung; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35908659
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2022.06.007 -
Chest Nov 2023Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patient care must include confirming a diagnosis with postbronchodilator spirometry. Because of the clinical heterogeneity and the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patient care must include confirming a diagnosis with postbronchodilator spirometry. Because of the clinical heterogeneity and the reality that airflow obstruction assessed by spirometry only partially reflects disease severity, a thorough clinical evaluation of the patient should include assessment of symptom burden and risk of exacerbations that permits the implementation of evidence-informed pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions. This guideline provides recommendations from a comprehensive systematic review with a meta-analysis and expert-informed clinical remarks to optimize maintenance pharmacologic therapy for individuals with stable COPD, and a revised and practical treatment pathway based on new evidence since the 2019 update of the Canadian Thoracic Society (CTS) Guideline. The key clinical questions were developed using the Patients/Population (P), Intervention(s) (I), Comparison/Comparator (C), and Outcome (O) model for three questions that focuses on the outcomes of symptoms (dyspnea)/health status, acute exacerbations, and mortality. The evidence from this systematic review and meta-analysis leads to the recommendation that all symptomatic patients with spirometry-confirmed COPD should receive long-acting bronchodilator maintenance therapy. Those with moderate to severe dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council ≥ 2) and/or impaired health status (COPD Assessment Test ≥ 10) and a low risk of exacerbations should receive combination therapy with a long-acting muscarinic antagonist/long-acting ẞ2-agonist (LAMA/LABA). For those with a moderate/severe dyspnea and/or impaired health status and a high risk of exacerbations should be prescribed triple combination therapy (LAMA/LABA/inhaled corticosteroids) azithromycin, roflumilast or N-acetylcysteine is recommended for specific populations; a recommendation against the use of theophylline, maintenance systemic oral corticosteroids such as prednisone and inhaled corticosteroid monotherapy is made for all COPD patients.
Topics: Humans; Drug Therapy, Combination; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Bronchodilator Agents; Canada; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Muscarinic Antagonists; Administration, Inhalation; Dyspnea; Adrenal Cortex Hormones
PubMed: 37690008
DOI: 10.1016/j.chest.2023.08.014 -
Pulmonary Circulation 2019Pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy (PTTM) is a fatal disease process in which pulmonary hypertension (PH) develops in the setting of malignancy. The purpose of...
Pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy (PTTM) is a fatal disease process in which pulmonary hypertension (PH) develops in the setting of malignancy. The purpose of this study is to present a detailed analysis of cases of PTTM reported in literature in the hopes of achieving more ante-mortem diagnoses. We conducted a systematic review of currently published and available cases of PTTM by searching the term "pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy" on the Pubmed.gov database. Seventy-nine publications were included consisting of 160 unique cases of PTTM. The most commonly reported malignancy was gastric adenocarcinoma (94 cases, 59%). Cough and dyspnea were reported in 61 (85%) and 102 (94%) cases, respectively. Hypoxemia was reported in 96 cases (95%). Elevation in D-dimer was noted in 36 cases (95%), presence of anemia in 32 cases (84%), and thrombocytopenia in 30 cases (77%). Common findings on chest computed tomography (CT) included ground-glass opacities (GGO) in 28 cases (82%) and nodules in 24 cases (86%). PH on echocardiography was noted in 59 cases (89%) with an average right ventricular systolic pressure of 71 mmHg. Common features of PTTM that are reported across the published literature include presence of dyspnea and cough, hypoxemia, with abnormal CT findings of GGO, nodules, and mediastinal/hilar lymphadenopathy, and PH. PTTM is a universally fatal disease process and this analysis provides a detailed examination of all the available published data that may help clinicians establish an earlier diagnosis of PTTM.
PubMed: 31032740
DOI: 10.1177/2045894019851000 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2022Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic and progressive disease, often punctuated by recurrent flare-ups or exacerbations. Magnesium sulfate, having a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a chronic and progressive disease, often punctuated by recurrent flare-ups or exacerbations. Magnesium sulfate, having a bronchodilatory effect, may have a potential role as an adjunct treatment in COPD exacerbations. However, comprehensive evidence of its effects is required to facilitate clinical decision-making.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of magnesium sulfate for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal, EU Clinical Trials Register and Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials. We also searched the proceedings of major respiratory conferences and reference lists of included studies up to 2 August 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included single- or double-blind parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing magnesium sulfate in adults with COPD exacerbations. We excluded cross-over trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The primary outcomes were: hospital admissions (from the emergency room); need for non-invasive ventilation (NIV), assisted ventilation or admission to intensive-care unit (ICU); and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were: length of hospital stay, mortality, adverse events, dyspnoea score, lung function and blood gas measurements. We assessed confidence in the evidence using GRADE methodology. For missing data, we contacted the study investigators.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 11 RCTs (10 double-blind and 1 single-blind) with a total 762 participants. The mean age of participants ranged from 62 to 76 years. Trials were single- or two-centre trials conducted in Iran, New Zealand, Nepal, Turkey, the UK, Tunisia and the USA between 2004 and 2018. We judged studies to be at low or unclear risk of bias for most of the domains. Three studies were at high risk for blinding and other biases. Intravenous magnesium sulfate versus placebo Seven studies (24 to 77 participants) were included. Fewer people may require hospital admission with magnesium infusion compared to placebo (odds ratio (OR) 0.45, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.88; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 7; 3 studies, 170 participants; low-certainty evidence). Intravenous magnesium may result in little to no difference in the requirement for non-invasive ventilation (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.75; very low-certainty evidence). There were no reported cases of endotracheal intubation (2 studies, 107 participants) or serious adverse events (1 study, 77 participants) in either group. Included studies did not report intensive care unit (ICU) admission or deaths. Magnesium infusion may reduce the length of hospital stay by a mean difference (MD) of 2.7 days (95% CI 4.73 days to 0.66 days; 2 studies, 54 participants; low-certainty evidence) and improve dyspnoea score by a standardised mean difference of -1.40 (95% CI -1.83 to -0.96; 2 studies, 101 participants; low-certainty evidence). We were uncertain about the effect of magnesium infusion on improving lung function or oxygen saturation. For all adverse events, the Peto OR was 0.14 (95% CI 0.02 to 1.00; 102 participants); however, the event rate was too low to reach a robust conclusion. Nebulised magnesium sulfate versus placebo Three studies (20 to 172 participants) were included. Magnesium inhalation may have little to no impact on hospital admission (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.82; very low-certainty evidence) or need for ventilatory support (NIV or mechanical ventilation) (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.20; very low-certainty evidence). It may result in fewer ICU admissions compared to placebo (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.00; very low-certainty evidence) and improvement in dyspnoea (MD -14.37, 95% CI -26.00 to -2.74; 1 study, 20 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were no serious adverse events reported in either group. There was one reported death in the placebo arm in one trial, but the number of participants was too small for a conclusion. There was limited evidence about the effect of magnesium inhalation on length of hospital stay, lung function outcomes or oxygen saturation. Included studies did not report adverse events. Magnesium sulfate versus ipratropium bromide A single study with 124 participants assessed nebulised magnesium sulfate plus intravenous magnesium infusion versus nebulised ipratropium plus intravenous normal saline. There was little to no difference between these groups in terms of hospital admission (OR 1.62, 95% CI 0.78 to 3.37), endotracheal intubation (OR 1.69, 95% CI 0.61 to 4.71) and length of hospital stay (MD 1.10 days, 95% CI -0.22 to 2.42), all with very low-certainty evidence. There were no data available for non-invasive ventilation, ICU admission and serious adverse events. Adverse events were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous magnesium sulfate may be associated with fewer hospital admissions, reduced length of hospital stay and improved dyspnoea scores compared to placebo. There is no evidence of a difference between magnesium infusion and placebo for NIV, lung function, oxygen saturation or adverse events. We found no evidence for ICU admission, endotracheal intubation, serious adverse events or mortality. For nebulised magnesium sulfate, we are unable to draw conclusions about its effects in COPD exacerbations for most of the outcomes. Studies reported possibly lower ICU admissions and a lesser degree of dyspnoea with magnesium inhalation compared to placebo; however, larger studies are required to yield a more precise estimate for these outcomes. Similarly, we could not identify any robust evidence for magnesium sulfate compared to ipratropium bromide. Future well-designed multicentre trials with larger samples are required, including subgroups according to severity of exacerbations and COPD phenotypes.
Topics: Disease Progression; Dyspnea; Humans; Ipratropium; Magnesium; Magnesium Sulfate; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35616126
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013506.pub2 -
Academic Emergency Medicine : Official... Mar 2016Acute heart failure (AHF) is one of the most common diagnoses assigned to emergency department (ED) patients who are hospitalized. Despite its high prevalence in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute heart failure (AHF) is one of the most common diagnoses assigned to emergency department (ED) patients who are hospitalized. Despite its high prevalence in the emergency setting, the diagnosis of AHF in ED patients with undifferentiated dyspnea can be challenging.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the operating characteristics of diagnostic elements available to the emergency physician for diagnosing AHF. Secondary objectives were to develop a test-treatment threshold model and to calculate interval likelihood ratios (LRs) for natriuretic peptides (NPs) by pooling patient-level results.
METHODS
PubMed, EMBASE, and selected bibliographies were searched from January 1965 to March 2015 using MeSH terms to address the ability of the following index tests to predict AHF as a cause of dyspnea in adult patients in the ED: history and physical examination, electrocardiogram, chest radiograph (CXR), B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), lung ultrasound (US), bedside echocardiography, and bioimpedance. A diagnosis of AHF based on clinical data combined with objective test results served as the criterion standard diagnosis. Data were analyzed using Meta-DiSc software. Authors of all NP studies were contacted to obtain patient-level data. The Quality Assessment Tool for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) for systematic reviews was utilized to evaluate the quality and applicability of the studies included.
RESULTS
Based on the included studies, the prevalence of AHF ranged from 29% to 79%. Index tests with pooled positive LRs ≥ 4 were the auscultation of S3 on physical examination (4.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.7 to 5.9), pulmonary edema on both CXR (4.8, 95% CI = 3.6 to 6.4) and lung US (7.4, 95% CI = 4.2 to 12.8), and reduced ejection fraction observed on bedside echocardiogram (4.1, 95% CI = 2.4 to 7.2). Tests with low negative LRs were BNP < 100 pg/mL (0.11, 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.16), NT-proBNP < 300 pg/mL (0.09, 95% CI = 0.03 to 0.34), and B-line pattern on lung US LR (0.16, 95% CI = 0.05 to 0.51). Interval LRs of BNP concentrations at the low end of "positive" results as defined by a cutoff of 100 pg/mL were substantially lower (100 to 200 pg/mL; 0.29, 95% CI = 0.23 to 0.38) than those associated with higher BNP concentrations (1000 to 1500 pg/mL; 7.12, 95% CI = 4.53 to 11.18). The interval LR of NT-proBNP concentrations even at very high values (30,000 to 200,000 pg/mL) was 3.30 (95% CI = 2.05 to 5.31).
CONCLUSIONS
Bedside lung US and echocardiography appear to the most useful tests for affirming the presence of AHF while NPs are valuable in excluding the diagnosis.
Topics: Acute Disease; Diagnosis, Differential; Dyspnea; Echocardiography; Electrocardiography; Emergency Service, Hospital; Heart Failure; Humans; Lung; Natriuretic Peptide, Brain; Peptide Fragments; Physical Examination; Radiography, Thoracic
PubMed: 26910112
DOI: 10.1111/acem.12878