-
Pediatric Pulmonology Feb 2024Tracheostomies are indicated in children to facilitate long-term ventilatory support, aid in the management of secretions, or manage upper airway obstruction. Children... (Review)
Review
Tracheostomies are indicated in children to facilitate long-term ventilatory support, aid in the management of secretions, or manage upper airway obstruction. Children with tracheostomies often experience ongoing airway complications, of which respiratory tract infections are common. They subsequently receive frequent courses of broad-spectrum antimicrobials for the prevention or treatment of respiratory tract infections. However, there is little consensus in practice with regard to the indication for treatment/prophylactic antimicrobial use, choice of antimicrobial, route of administration, or duration of treatment between different centers. Routine antibiotic use is associated with adverse effects and an increased risk of antimicrobial resistance. Tracheal cultures are commonly obtained from pediatric tracheostomy patients, with the aim of helping guide antimicrobial therapy choice. However, a positive culture alone is not diagnostic of infection and the role of routine surveillance cultures remains contentious. Inhaled antimicrobial use is also widespread in the management of tracheostomy-associated infections; this is largely based on the theoretical benefits of higher airway antibiotic concentrations. The role of prophylactic inhaled antimicrobial use for tracheostomy-associated infections remains largely unproven. This systematic review summarizes the current evidence base for antimicrobial selection, duration, and administration route in pediatric tracheostomy-associated infections. It also highlights significant variation in practice between centers and the urgent need for further prospective evidence to guide the management of these vulnerable patients.
Topics: Child; Humans; Tracheostomy; Trachea; Respiratory Tract Infections; Postoperative Complications; Anti-Bacterial Agents
PubMed: 38010838
DOI: 10.1002/ppul.26766 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2013Nebulizers and metered dose inhalers (MDI) have both been adapted for delivering aerosol bronchodilation to mechanically ventilated patients, but there is incomplete... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
Nebulizers and metered dose inhalers (MDI) have both been adapted for delivering aerosol bronchodilation to mechanically ventilated patients, but there is incomplete knowledge as to the most effective method of delivery.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effectiveness of nebulizers and MDIs for bronchodilator delivery in invasively ventilated, critically ill adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 5); Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to Week 19 2012); Ovid EMBASE (1980 to Week 19 2012); CINAHL via EBSCOhost (1982 to Week 19 2012) and reference lists of articles. We searched conference proceedings and reference lists of articles. We also contacted manufacturers and researchers in this field. There were no constraints based on language or publication status.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including randomized cross-over trials where the order of the intervention was randomized, comparing the nebulizer and MDI for aerosol bronchodilation in mechanically ventilated adult patients in critical care units.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information where required. We collected information about adverse effects from the trials.
MAIN RESULTS
This review included three trials, two addressing the primary outcome measure of a reduction of airway resistance (measured as a reduction in interrupter and additional airway resistance) with a total of 28 patients (n =10, n =18) and two addressing adverse changes to haemodynamic observations with a total of 36 patients (n =18, n =18). Limitations in data availability and reporting in the included trials precluded meta-analysis and therefore the present review consisted of a descriptive analysis. Risk of bias in the included trials was judged as low or of unknown risk across the majority of items in the 'Risk of bias' tool.Cautious interpretation of the included study results suggests that nebulizers could be a more effective method of bronchodilator administration than MDI in terms of a change in resistance. No apparent changes to haemodynamic observations (measured as an increase in heart rate) were associated with either mode of delivery. Due to missing data issues, meta analyses were not possible. Additionally, small sample sizes and variability between the studies with regards to patient diagnoses, bronchodilator agent and administration technique mean that it would be speculative to infer definitive recommendations based on these results at this time. This is insufficient evidence to determine which is the most effective delivery system between nebuliser and MDI for aerosol bronchodilation in adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Existing randomized controlled trials, including randomized cross-over trials where the order of the intervention was randomized, comparing nebulizer and MDI for aerosol bronchodilation in mechanically ventilated adult patients do not provide sufficient evidence to support either delivery method at this time.
Topics: Adult; Aerosols; Airway Resistance; Bronchodilator Agents; Critical Illness; Heart Rate; Humans; Intensive Care Units; Metered Dose Inhalers; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiration, Artificial
PubMed: 23740736
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008863.pub2 -
BMJ Open Respiratory Research Dec 2020Asthma is a common, heterogeneous disease that is characterised by chronic airway inflammation and variable expiratory airflow limitation. Current guidelines use...
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a common, heterogeneous disease that is characterised by chronic airway inflammation and variable expiratory airflow limitation. Current guidelines use spirometric measures for asthma assessment. This systematic review aimed to assess whether the most commonly reported tests of small airways function could contribute to the diagnosis of asthma.
METHODS
Standard systematic review methodology was used, and a range of electronic databases was searched (Embase, MEDLINE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Web of Science, DARE). Studies that included physiological tests of small airways function to diagnose asthma in adults were included, with no restrictions on language or date. The risk of bias and quality assessment tools used were Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality tool for cross-sectional studies and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 for diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) studies.
RESULTS
7072 studies were identified and 10 studies met review criteria. 7 included oscillation techniques and 5 included maximal mid-expiratory flow (MMEF). Studies were small and of variable quality. In oscillometry, total resistance (R5) and reactance at 5 Hz (X5) was altered in asthma compared with healthy controls. The percentage predicted of MMEF was lower in patients with asthma compared with controls in all studies and lower than the % predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s. In DTA of oscillometry, R5 showed a sensitivity between 69% and 72% and specificity between 61% and 86%.
CONCLUSION
There were differences in the results of physiological tests of small airway function in patients with asthma compared with controls. However, studies are small and heterogeneous. Further studies are needed to assess the effectiveness of these tests on a larger scale, including studies to determine which test methodology is the most useful in asthma.
Topics: Adult; Asthma; Cross-Sectional Studies; Diagnostic Tests, Routine; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Spirometry; United States
PubMed: 33371011
DOI: 10.1136/bmjresp-2020-000770 -
Sleep & Breathing = Schlaf & Atmung Dec 2010Treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) using methods for increasing upper airway muscle tonus has been controversial and poorly reported. Thus, a review of the... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) using methods for increasing upper airway muscle tonus has been controversial and poorly reported. Thus, a review of the evidence is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of these methods.
DESIGN
The design used was a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
DATA SOURCES
Data sources are from the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase and Scielo, registries of ongoing trials, theses indexed at Biblioteca Regional de Medicina/Pan-American Health Organization of the World Health Organization and the reference lists of all the trials retrieved.
REVIEW METHODS
This was a review of randomized or quasi-randomized double-blind trials on OSA. Two reviewers independently applied eligibility criteria. One reviewer assessed study quality and extracted data, and these processes were checked by a second reviewer. The primary outcome was a decrease in the apnea/hypopnea index (AHI) of below five episodes per hour. Other outcomes were subjective sleep quality, sleep quality measured by night polysomnography, quality of life measured subjectively and adverse events associated with the treatments.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Three eligible trials were included. Two studies showed improvements through the objective and subjective analyses, and one study showed improvement of snoring, but not of AHI while the subjective analyses showed no improvement. The adverse events were reported and they were not significant.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no accepted scientific evidence that methods aiming to increase muscle tonus of the stomatognathic system are effective in reducing AHI to below five events per hour. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the efficacy of such methods.
Topics: Airway Resistance; Cross-Over Studies; Double-Blind Method; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Evidence-Based Medicine; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Laryngeal Muscles; Male; Middle Aged; Muscle Tonus; Palatal Muscles; Pharyngeal Muscles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive; Tongue
PubMed: 20563659
DOI: 10.1007/s11325-010-0377-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2015The vicious cycle hypothesis for bronchiectasis predicts that bacterial colonisation of the respiratory tract perpetuates inflammatory change. This damages the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The vicious cycle hypothesis for bronchiectasis predicts that bacterial colonisation of the respiratory tract perpetuates inflammatory change. This damages the mucociliary escalator, preventing bacterial clearance and allowing persistence of pro-inflammatory mediators. Conventional treatment with physiotherapy and intermittent antibiotics is believed to improve the condition of people with bronchiectasis, although no conclusive data show that these interventions influence the natural history of the condition. Various strategies have been tried to interrupt this cycle of infection and inflammation, including prolonging antibiotic treatment with the goal of allowing the airway mucosa to heal.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the benefits of prolonged antibiotic therapy in the treatment of patients with bronchiectasis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Trials Register and reference lists of identified articles. Searches were current as of February 2014.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials examining the use of prolonged antibiotic therapy (for four or more weeks) in the treatment of bronchiectasis compared with placebo or usual care.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors to ask for missing information.
MAIN RESULTS
Eighteen trials met the inclusion criteria, randomly assigning a total of 1157 participants. Antibiotics were given for between four weeks and 83 weeks. Limited meta-analysis was possible because of the diversity of outcomes reported in these trials. Based on the number of participants with at least one exacerbation, the meta-analysis showed significant effects in favour of the intervention (odds ratio (OR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19 to 0.52; P value < 0.00001), with events occurring in 271 per 1000 people in the intervention arm (95% CI 126 to 385) and in 546 per 1000 in the control population, based on evidence of moderate quality. A non-statistically significant reduction in hospitalisation favoured the use of prolonged antibiotics with a moderate quality grade of supporting evidence (37 per 1000 in the intervention arm (95% CI 13 to 96) and 87 per 1000 in control (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.11; P value = 0.08). Drug resistance developed in 36 of 220 participants taking antibiotics compared with 10 of 211 participants given placebo or standard therapy (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.20 to 10.07; P value = 0.02), translating to natural frequencies of 155 per 1000 in the intervention arm (95% CI 59 to 346) and 50 per 1000 in the control arm. The intervention was well tolerated with no overall significant difference in withdrawal between treatment and placebo groups (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.49). Diarrhoea was commonly reported as an adverse event, particularly with an oral intervention.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Available evidence shows benefit associated with use of prolonged antibiotics in the treatment of patients with bronchiectasis, at least halving the odds of exacerbation (with 275 fewer exacerbations per every 1000 people treated in the antibiotic arm compared with the control arm) and hospitalisation (50 fewer hospitalisations per 1000 people in the antibiotic arm compared with the control arm). However, the risk of emerging drug resistance is increased more than threefold. This review is limited by diversity of trials and by evidence of moderate to low quality. Further randomised controlled trials with adequate power and standardised end points are required.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bronchiectasis; Child; Diarrhea; Disease Progression; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Hospitalization; Humans; Middle Aged; Odds Ratio; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 26270620
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001392.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2015Bronchiectasis is a chronic respiratory disease characterised by abnormal dilatation of the bronchi, and presents typically with a chronic productive cough (or chronic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Bronchiectasis is a chronic respiratory disease characterised by abnormal dilatation of the bronchi, and presents typically with a chronic productive cough (or chronic wet cough in children) and recurrent infective exacerbations. It significantly impacts daily activities and quality of life, and can lead to recurrent hospitalisations, severe lung function impairment, respiratory failure and even death.
OBJECTIVES
To provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of interventions for adults and children with bronchiectasis from Cochrane reviews.To identify gaps in the evidence base that will inform recommendations for new research and reviews, and to summarise information on reported outcomes and make recommendations for the reporting of standard outcomes in future trials and reviews.
METHODS
We included Cochrane reviews of non-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis. We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The search is current to 11 February 2015. We also identified trials that were potentially eligible for, but not currently included in, published reviews to make recommendations for new Cochrane reviews. We assessed the quality of included reviews using the AMSTAR criteria. We presented an evidence synthesis of data from reviews alongside an evidence map of clinical trials and guideline data. The primary outcomes were exacerbations, lung function and quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 21 reviews but extracted data from, and rated the quality of, only nine reviews that reported results for people with bronchiectasis alone. Of the reviews with no usable data, two reviews included studies with mixed clinical populations where data were not reported separately for people with bronchiectasis and 10 reviews did not contain any trials. Of the 40 studies included across the nine reviews, three (number of participants nine to 34) included children. The studies ranged from single session to year-long studies. Each review included from one to 11 trials and 28 (70%) trials in the overview included 40 or fewer participants. The total number of participants included in reviews ranged from 40 to 1040. The age range of adult participants was from 36 to 73 years and children ranged from six to 16 years. The proportion of male participants ranged from 21% to 72%. Where reported, mean baseline forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) ranged from 1.17 L to 1.66 L and from 47% to 88% predicted. Most of the reviews had search dates older than two years.We have summarised the published evidence as outlined in Cochrane reviews, but it was not possible to draw definitive conclusions. There was inconclusive evidence on the use of long-term antibiotics and nebulised hypertonic saline for reducing exacerbation frequency and evidence that human deoxyribonuclease (RhDNase) increases exacerbation frequency. Improvements in lung function were reported for inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) though this was small and not clinically relevant. Evidence of benefit for hyperosmolar agents and mucolytics was inconclusive. There was limited evidence of improvements in quality of life with airway clearance techniques and physical therapy but evidence of benefit for hyperosmolar agents was inconclusive. Secondary outcomes were not clearly reported in all trials in the included reviews. Improvements in dyspnoea, wheeze and cough-free days were reported for small trials of ICS and LABA (long-acting beta2-agonsts)/ICS and cough reduction was also reported for a small bromhexine trial. Reduction in sputum production was reported for long-term antibiotics and airway clearance techniques but evidence of benefit for hyperosmolar agents was inconclusive.Adverse events were included as outcomes in seven reviews. The review of long-term (four weeks to one year) prophylactic courses of antibiotics reported significantly more cases of wheeze (Peto odd ratio (OR) 8.56, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 1.63 to 44.93), dyspnoea (12 versus three, P value = 0.01) and chest pain (seven versus zero, P value = 0.01) from the same trial (74 participants) but no differences in occurrence of diarrhoea, rash or number of withdrawals. In the review of mucolytics versus placebo, relevant outcomes were not reported for erdosteine comparisons and no significant adverse effects were reported for bromhexine, though adverse events were associated with RhDNase (OR 28.19, 95% CI 3.77 to 210.85, 1 study). Of the remaining five reviews, adverse events were not reported in the single trials included in the ICS review or the physical therapy review and the impact of adverse events in the single trial included in the inhaled LABA/ICS combination versus ICS review were unclear. The reviews of short-term courses of antibiotics and inhaled hyperosmolar agents reported no significant differences in occurrence of adverse events. Fewer admissions to hospital were reported for long-term antibiotics, but this outcome was not reported in all reviews. No reviews reported differences in mortality, but again this outcome was not included in all reviews.We did not explicitly include antibiotic resistance as an outcome in the review, but this was unclear in the Cochrane reviews and evidence from other trials should be considered.We rated all reviews as high quality (AMSTAR), though opportunities for improved reporting (e.g. summary of findings and GRADE evaluation of the evidence) were identified for inclusion in future updates of the reviews. However, the majority of trials were not high quality and confidence in the effects of treatments, therefore, requires additional evidence from larger and more methodologically robust trials. We evaluated the overall coverage of important topics in bronchiectasis by mapping the quality of the current evidence base against published guidelines and identifying high priority areas for new research on; use of short-course and long-term antibiotics, ICS and oral corticosteroids, inhaled hyperosmolars, mucolytics, and use of airway clearance techniques.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This overview clearly points to significant opportunities for further research aimed at improving outcomes for people with bronchiectasis. We have highlighted important endpoints for studies (particularly exacerbations, quality of life and lung function), and areas of clinical practice that are in most urgent need of evidence-based support (including long-term antibiotics, ICSs and mucolytics).As the evidence is confined to small trials of short duration, it is not currently possible to assess the balance between the benefits and potential harms of treatments for bronchiectasis.
Topics: Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bronchiectasis; Child; Deoxyribonucleases; Expectorants; Humans; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Review Literature as Topic; Saline Solution, Hypertonic
PubMed: 26171905
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010337.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2018Inhaled antibiotics are commonly used to treat persistent airway infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa that contributes to lung damage in people with cystic fibrosis.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Inhaled antibiotics are commonly used to treat persistent airway infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa that contributes to lung damage in people with cystic fibrosis. Current guidelines recommend inhaled tobramycin for individuals with cystic fibrosis and persistent Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection who are aged six years or older. The aim is to reduce bacterial load in the lungs so as to reduce inflammation and deterioration of lung function. This is an update of a previously published review.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects long-term inhaled antibiotic therapy in people with cystic fibrosis on clinical outcomes (lung function, frequency of exacerbations and nutrition), quality of life and adverse events (including drug sensitivity reactions and survival).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, compiled from electronic database searches and handsearching of journals and conference abstract books. We also searched ongoing trials registries.Date of last search: 13 February 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We selected trials if inhaled anti-pseudomonal antibiotic treatment was used for at least three months in people with cystic fibrosis, treatment allocation was randomised or quasi-randomised, and there was a control group (either placebo, no placebo or another inhaled antibiotic).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected trials, judged the risk of bias, extracted data from these trials and judged the quality of the evidence using the GRADE system.
MAIN RESULTS
The searches identified 333 citations to 98 trials; 18 trials (3042 participants aged between five and 56 years) met the inclusion criteria. Limited data were available for meta-analyses due to the variability of trial design and reporting of results. A total of 11 trials (1130 participants) compared an inhaled antibiotic to placebo or usual treatment for a duration between three and 33 months. Five trials (1255 participants) compared different antibiotics, two trials (585 participants) compared different regimens of tobramycin and one trial (90 participants) compared intermittent tobramycin with continuous tobramycin alternating with aztreonam. One of the trials (18 participants) compared to placebo and a different antibiotic and so fell into both groups. The most commonly studied antibiotic was tobramycin which was studied in 12 trials.We found limited evidence that inhaled antibiotics improved lung function (four of the 11 placebo-controlled trials, n = 814). Compared to placebo, inhaled antibiotics also reduced the frequency of exacerbations (three trials, n = 946), risk ratio 0.66 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 0.93). There were insufficient data for us to be able to report an effect on nutritional outcomes or survival and there were insufficient data for us to ascertain the effect on quality of life. There was no significant effect on antibiotic resistance seen in the two trials that were included in meta-analyses. Tinnitus and voice alteration were the only adverse events significantly more common in the inhaled antibiotics group. The overall quality of evidence was deemed to be low for most outcomes due to risk of bias within the trials and imprecision due to low event rates.Of the eight trials that compared different inhaled antibiotics or different antibiotic regimens, there was only one trial in each comparison. Forced expiratory volume at one second (FEV) % predicted was only found to be significantly improved with aztreonam lysine for inhalation compared to tobramycin (n = 273), mean difference -3.40% (95% CI -6.63 to -0.17). However, the method of defining the endpoint was different to the remaining trials and the participants were exposed to tobramycin for a long period making interpretation of the results problematic. No significant differences were found in the remaining comparisons with regard to lung function. Pulmonary exacerbations were measured in different ways, but one trial (n = 273) found that the number of people treated with antibiotics was lower in those receiving aztreonam than tobramycin, risk ratio 0.66 (95% CI 0.51 to 0.86). We found the quality of evidence for these comparisons to be directly related to the risk of bias within the individual trials and varied from low to high.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Inhaled anti-pseudomonal antibiotic treatment probably improves lung function and reduces exacerbation rate, but pooled estimates of the level of benefit were very limited. The best evidence is for inhaled tobramycin. More evidence from trials measuring similar outcomes in the same way is needed to determine a better measure of benefit. Longer-term trials are needed to look at the effect of inhaled antibiotics on quality of life, survival and nutritional outcomes.
PubMed: 29607494
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001021.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2013The treatment of choice for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) applied via a mask during sleep. However,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The treatment of choice for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is continuous positive airways pressure (CPAP) applied via a mask during sleep. However, this is not tolerated by all individuals and its role in mild OSA is not proven. Drug therapy has been proposed as an alternative to CPAP in some patients with mild to moderate sleep apnoea and could be of value in patients intolerant of CPAP. A number of mechanisms have been proposed by which drugs could reduce the severity of OSA. These include an increase in tone in the upper airway dilator muscles, an increase in ventilatory drive, a reduction in the proportion of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, an increase in cholinergic tone during sleep, an increase in arousal threshold, a reduction in airway resistance and a reduction in surface tension in the upper airway.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the efficacy of drug therapies in the specific treatment of sleep apnoea.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials. Searches were current as of July 2012.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised, placebo controlled trials involving adult patients with confirmed OSA. We excluded trials if continuous positive airways pressure, mandibular devices or oxygen therapy were used. We excluded studies investigating treatment of associated conditions such as excessive sleepiness, hypertension, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and obesity.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures recommended by The Cochrane Collaboration.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty trials of 25 drugs, involving 516 participants, contributed data to the review. Drugs had several different proposed modes of action and the results were grouped accordingly in the review. Each of the studies stated that the participants had OSA but diagnostic criteria were not always explicit and it was possible that some patients with central apnoeas may have been recruited.Acetazolamide, eszopiclone, naltrexone, nasal lubricant (phosphocholinamine) and physiostigmine were administered for one to two nights only. Donepezil in patients with and without Alzheimer's disease, fluticasone in patients with allergic rhinitis, combinations of ondansetrone and fluoxetine and paroxetine were trials of one to three months duration, however most of the studies were small and had methodological limitations. The overall quality of the available evidence was low.The primary outcomes for the systematic review were the apnoea hypopnoea index (AHI) and the level of sleepiness associated with OSA, estimated by the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). AHI was reported in 25 studies and of these 10 showed statistically significant reductions in AHI.Fluticasone in patients with allergic rhinitis was well tolerated and reduced the severity of sleep apnoea compared with placebo (AHI 23.3 versus 30.3; P < 0.05) and improved subjective daytime alertness. Excessive sleepiness was reported to be altered in four studies, however the only clinically and statistically significant change in ESS of -2.9 (SD 2.9; P = 0.04) along with a small but statistically significant reduction in AHI of -9.4 (SD 17.2; P = 0.03) was seen in patients without Alzheimer's disease receiving donepezil for one month. In 23 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease donepezil led to a significant reduction in AHI (donepezil 20 (SD 15) to 9.9 (SD 11.5) versus placebo 23.2 (SD 26.4) to 22.9 (SD 28.8); P = 0.035) after three months of treatment but no reduction in sleepiness was reported. High dose combined treatment with ondansetron 24 mg and fluoxetine 10 mg showed a 40.5% decrease in AHI from the baseline at treatment day 28. Paroxetine was shown to reduce AHI compared to placebo (-6.10 events/hour; 95% CI -11.00 to -1.20) but failed to improve daytime symptoms.Promising results from the preliminary mirtazapine study failed to be reproduced in the two more recent multicentre trials and, moreover, the use of mirtazapine was associated with significant weight gain and sleepiness. Few data were presented on the long-term tolerability of any of the compounds used.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of drug therapy in the treatment of OSA. Small studies have reported positive effects of certain agents on short-term outcomes. Certain agents have been shown to reduce the AHI in largely unselected populations with OSA by between 24% and 45%. For donepezil and fluticasone, studies of longer duration with a larger population and better matching of groups are required to establish whether the change in AHI and impact on daytime symptoms are reproducible. Individual patients had more complete responses to particular drugs. It is possible that better matching of drugs to patients according to the dominant mechanism of their OSA will lead to better results and this also needs further study.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive
PubMed: 23728641
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003002.pub3 -
American Journal of Rhinology & Allergy 2014The middle turbinate (MT) is a structure that is often carefully preserved during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in an effort to preserve nasal physiology and serve as... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The middle turbinate (MT) is a structure that is often carefully preserved during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) in an effort to preserve nasal physiology and serve as an anatomic landmark. However, resection is performed in select cases because of involvement of the MT in the inflammatory process, obstruction, or instability. Therefore, significant controversy exists among surgeons regarding the indications for proceeding with MT resection in ESS. This study evaluates clinical outcomes of MT resection after ESS.
METHODS
An English language search of the PubMed and Ovid databases was conducted for publications examining clinical outcomes of MT resection after ESS performed for chronic rhinosinusitis. Two authors independently examined the articles to identify those meeting inclusion criteria. Any differences over which studies to include were resolved by discussion and consensus. Bias assessment was conducted using the Cochrane Collaboration bias tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa bias tool for cohort and case-control studies.
RESULTS
After initial screening, search results revealed 71 articles that warranted detailed evaluation. After applying inclusion criteria, 9 studies were selected. A total of 2123 patients were included among the studies. All studies were controlled. Within the limited available data, olfaction scores may be improved in the MT resection patients compared with MT preservation patients. No difference between the groups was noted for quality of life outcomes, nasal airway resistance, or rates of postoperative frontal sinusitis. In regard to postoperative endoscopic examinations, some studies note greater improvement in the MT resection group compared with the MT preservation group, while others were equivalent.
CONCLUSION
Although some studies show outcome benefit in MT resection patients compared with MT preservation patients, several others show no difference. When MT resection was appropriately indicated, no studies showed detrimental effects compared with MT preservation in their designated outcomes. Additional more stringent studies are warranted.
Topics: Animals; Endoscopy; Humans; Paranasal Sinuses; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Rhinoplasty; Treatment Outcome; Turbinates
PubMed: 25514487
DOI: 10.2500/ajra.2014.28.4097 -
Phytomedicine : International Journal... Mar 2003To investigate if extracts from dried ivy leaves (Hedera helix L.) are effective in the treatment of chronic airway obstruction in children suffering from bronchial... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To investigate if extracts from dried ivy leaves (Hedera helix L.) are effective in the treatment of chronic airway obstruction in children suffering from bronchial asthma.
DESIGN
Systematic review of trials documented in the literature with re-analysis of original data.
TRIALS
5 randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of ivy leaf extract preparations in chronic bronchitis, 3 of which were conducted in children and met our selection criteria. One compared ivy leaf extract cough drops to placebo, one compared suppositories to drops and one tested syrup against drops.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Body-plethysmographic and spirometric measures.
RESULTS
Drops were significantly superior to placebo in reducing airway resistance (primary outcome measure; p = 0.04 two-sided) and descriptively superior in all other 'objective' measures. For syrup and suppositories, at least 54%, resp. 35% of the effect against placebo were preserved.
CONCLUSIONS
The trials included in this review indicate that ivy leaf extract preparations have effects with respect to an improvement of respiratory functions of children with chronic bronchial asthma, but more far-reaching conclusions can hardly be drawn because of a meagre database, including the fact that only one primary trial included a placebo control. Further research, particularly into the long-term efficacy of the herbal extract, is needed.
Topics: Asthma; Child; Hedera; Humans; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 12725580
DOI: 10.1078/094471103321659979