-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2005The pathophysiology of so called 'cough variant asthma' has not received a great deal of research interest and opinion lies divided as to whether it is really asthma or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The pathophysiology of so called 'cough variant asthma' has not received a great deal of research interest and opinion lies divided as to whether it is really asthma or not. The proponents of cough variant asthma suggest a therapeutic trial of medications usually used to treat asthma
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness of inhaled ss2 agonists in non-specific chronic cough in children over the age of 2 years.
SEARCH STRATEGY
The Cochrane Airways Group database (including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CCRT) were searched. Additional searching included hand searching of medical journals through the Cochrane Collaboration, references, references of references listed in primary sources and personal communication with authors. In addition "Grey literature" including theses, internal reports, non-peer reviewed journals were sought.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised (randomised and quasi-randomised) controlled clinical trials in which inhaled ss2 agonists were given for chronic cough in children over 2 years of age were included. Two reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion and methodological quality.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data for trials of salbutamol versus placebo were extracted by both reviewers and entered into the Cochrane Collaboration software program Review Manager, version 4.2
MAIN RESULTS
In children presenting with isolated chronic cough there was no significant difference between salbutamol treated group and placebo group.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Salbutamol was no different from placebo in reducing the frequency of cough measured objectively or scored subjectively.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adrenergic beta-Agonists; Albuterol; Child; Chronic Disease; Cough; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 16034971
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005373 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2015Hyperkalaemia is a potentially life-threatening electrolyte disturbance which may lead to cardiac arrhythmias and death. Renal replacement therapy is known to be... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hyperkalaemia is a potentially life-threatening electrolyte disturbance which may lead to cardiac arrhythmias and death. Renal replacement therapy is known to be effective in treating hyperkalaemia, but safe and effective pharmacological interventions are needed to prevent dialysis or avoid the complications of hyperkalaemia until dialysis is performed.
OBJECTIVES
This review looked at the benefits and harms of pharmacological treatments used in the acute management of hyperkalaemia in adults. This review evaluated the therapies that reduce serum potassium as well as those that prevent complications of hyperkalaemia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Kidney and Transplant's Specialised Register to 18 August 2015 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at any pharmacological intervention for the acute management of hyperkalaemia in adults were included in this review. Non-standard study designs such as cross-over studies were also included. Eligible studies enrolled adults (aged 18 years and over) with hyperkalaemia, defined as serum potassium concentration ≥ 4.9 mmol/L, to receive pharmacological therapy to reduce serum potassium or to prevent arrhythmias. Patients with artificially induced hyperkalaemia were excluded from this review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
All three authors screened titles and abstracts, and data extraction and risk of bias assessment was performed independently by at least two authors. Studies reported in non-English language journals were translated before assessment. Authors were contacted when information about results or study methodology was missing from the original publication. Although we planned to group all studies of a particular pharmacological therapy regardless of administration route or dose for analysis, we were unable to conduct meta-analyses because of the small numbers of studies evaluating any given treatment. For continuous data we reported mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
MAIN RESULTS
We included seven studies (241 participants) in this review. Meta-analysis of these seven included studies was not possible due to heterogeneity of the treatments and because many of the studies did not provide sufficient statistical information with their results. Allocation and blinding methodology was poorly described in most studies. No study evaluated the efficacy of pharmacological interventions for preventing clinically relevant outcomes such as mortality and cardiac arrhythmias; however there is evidence that several commonly used therapies effectively reduce serum potassium levels. Salbutamol administered via either nebulizer or metered-dose inhaler (MDI) significantly reduced serum potassium compared with placebo. The peak effect of 10 mg nebulised salbutamol was seen at 120 minutes (MD -1.29 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.64 to -0.94) and at 90 minutes for 20 mg nebulised salbutamol (1 study: MD -1.18 mmol/L, 95% CI -1.54 to -0.82). One study reported 1.2 mg salbutamol via MDI 1.2 mg produced a significant decrease in serum potassium beginning at 10 minutes (MD -0.20 mmol/L, P < 0.05) and a maximal decrease at 60 minutes (MD -0.34 mmol/L, P < 0.0001). Intravenous (IV) and nebulised salbutamol produced comparable effects (2 studies). When compared to other interventions, salbutamol had similar effect to insulin-dextrose (2 studies) but was more effective than bicarbonate at 60 minutes (MD -0.46 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.10; 1 study). Insulin-dextrose was more effective than IV bicarbonate (1 study) and aminophylline (1 study). Insulin-dextrose, bicarbonate and aminophylline were not studied in any placebo-controlled studies. None of the included studies evaluated the effect of IV calcium or potassium binding resins in the treatment of hyperkalaemia.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Evidence for the acute pharmacological management of hyperkalaemia is limited, with no clinical studies demonstrating a reduction in adverse patient outcomes. Of the studied agents, salbutamol via any route and IV insulin-dextrose appear to be most effective at reducing serum potassium. There is limited evidence to support the use of other interventions, such as IV sodium bicarbonate or aminophylline. The effectiveness of potassium binding resins and IV calcium salts has not been tested in RCTs and requires further study before firm recommendations for clinical practice can be made.
PubMed: 35658162
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010344.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2021Asthma is characterised by chronic inflammation of the airways and recurrent exacerbations with wheezing, chest tightness, and cough. Treatment with inhaled steroids and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Regular treatment with formoterol and an inhaled corticosteroid versus regular treatment with salmeterol and an inhaled corticosteroid for chronic asthma: serious adverse events.
BACKGROUND
Asthma is characterised by chronic inflammation of the airways and recurrent exacerbations with wheezing, chest tightness, and cough. Treatment with inhaled steroids and bronchodilators can result in good control of symptoms, prevention of further morbidity, and improved quality of life. However, an increase in serious adverse events with the use of both regular formoterol and regular salmeterol (long-acting beta₂-agonists) compared with placebo for chronic asthma has been demonstrated in previous Cochrane Reviews. This increase was statistically significant in trials that did not randomise participants to an inhaled corticosteroid, but not when formoterol or salmeterol was combined with an inhaled corticosteroid. The confidence intervals were found to be too wide to ensure that the addition of an inhaled corticosteroid renders regular long-acting beta₂-agonists completely safe; few participants and insufficient serious adverse events in these trials precluded a definitive decision about the safety of combination treatments.
OBJECTIVES
To assess risks of mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events in trials that have randomised patients with chronic asthma to regular formoterol and an inhaled corticosteroid versus regular salmeterol and an inhaled corticosteroid.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Register of Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries to identify reports of randomised trials for inclusion. We checked manufacturers' websites and clinical trial registers for unpublished trial data, as well as Food and Drug Administration (FDA) submissions in relation to formoterol and salmeterol. The date of the most recent search was 24 February 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included controlled clinical trials with a parallel design, recruiting patients of any age and severity of asthma, if they randomised patients to treatment with regular formoterol versus regular salmeterol (each with a randomised inhaled corticosteroid) and were of at least 12 weeks' duration.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion in the review, extracted outcome data from published papers and trial registries, and applied GRADE rating for the results. We sought unpublished data on mortality and serious adverse events from study sponsors and authors. The primary outcomes were all cause mortality and non-fatal serious adverse events. We chose not to calculate an average result from all the formulations of formoterol and inhaled steroid, as the doses and delivery devices are too diverse to assume a single class effect.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-one studies in 11,572 adults and adolescents and two studies in 723 children met the eligibility criteria of the review. No data were available for two studies; therefore these were not included in the analysis. Among adult and adolescent studies, seven compared formoterol and budesonide to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 7764), six compared formoterol and beclomethasone to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 1923), two compared formoterol and mometasone to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 1126), two compared formoterol and fluticasone to salmeterol and fluticasone (N = 790), and one compared formoterol and budesonide to salmeterol and budesonide (N = 229). In total, five deaths were reported among adults, none of which was thought to be related to asthma. The certainty of evidence for all-cause mortality was low, as there were not enough deaths to permit any precise conclusions regarding the risk of mortality on combination formoterol versus combination salmeterol. In all, 201 adults reported non-fatal serious adverse events. In studies comparing formoterol and budesonide to salmeterol and fluticasone, there were 77 in the formoterol arm and 68 in the salmeterol arm (Peto odds ratio (OR) 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.59; 5935 participants, 7 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). In the formoterol and beclomethasone studies, there were 12 adults in the formoterol arm and 13 in the salmeterol arm with events (Peto OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.08; 1941 participants, 6 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). In the formoterol and mometasone studies, there were 18 in the formoterol arm and 11 in the salmeterol arm (Peto OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.20; 1126 participants, 2 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). One adult in the formoterol and fluticasone studies in the salmeterol arm experienced an event (Peto OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.00 to 3.10; 293 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). Another adult in the formoterol and budesonide compared to salmeterol and budesonide study in the formoterol arm had an event (Peto OR 7.45, 95% CI 0.15 to 375.68; 229 participants, 1 study; low-certainty evidence). Only 46 adults were reported to have experienced asthma-related serious adverse events. The certainty of the evidence was low to very low due to the small number of events and the absence of independent assessment of causation. The two studies in children compared formoterol and fluticasone to salmeterol and fluticasone. No deaths and no asthma-related serious adverse events were reported in these studies. Four all-cause serious adverse events were reported: three in the formoterol arm, and one in the salmeterol arm (Peto OR 2.72, 95% CI 0.38 to 19.46; 548 participants, 2 studies; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, for both adults and children, evidence is insufficient to show whether regular formoterol in combination with budesonide, beclomethasone, fluticasone, or mometasone has a different safety profile from salmeterol in combination with fluticasone or budesonide. Five deaths of any cause were reported across all studies and no deaths from asthma; this information is insufficient to permit any firm conclusions about the relative risks of mortality on combination formoterol in comparison to combination salmeterol inhalers. Evidence on all-cause non-fatal serious adverse events indicates that there is probably little to no difference between formoterol/budesonide and salmeterol/fluticasone inhalers. However events for the other formoterol combination inhalers were too few to allow conclusions. Only 46 non-fatal serious adverse events were thought to be asthma related; this small number in addition to the absence of independent outcome assessment means that we have very low confidence for this outcome. We found no evidence of safety issues that would affect the choice between salmeterol and formoterol combination inhalers used for regular maintenance therapy by adults and children with asthma.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Asthmatic Agents; Asthma; Beclomethasone; Bronchodilator Agents; Budesonide; Child; Chronic Disease; Drug Therapy, Combination; Fluticasone; Formoterol Fumarate; Glucocorticoids; Humans; Mometasone Furoate; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salmeterol Xinafoate
PubMed: 33852162
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007694.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2012Tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) are both accepted in the routine management for people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Tiotropium and long-acting beta(2)-agonists (LABAs) are both accepted in the routine management for people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There are new studies which have compared tiotropium with LABAs, including some that have evaluated recently introduced LABAs.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the relative clinical effects of tiotropium bromide alone versus LABA alone, upon measures of quality of life, exacerbations, lung function and serious adverse events, in people with stable COPD.To critically appraise and summarise current evidence on the costs and cost-effectiveness associated with tiotropium compared to LABA in people with COPD.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and economic evaluations from searching NHS EED and HEED (date of last search February 2012). We found additional trials from web-based clinical trial registers.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included RCTs and full economic evaluations if they compared effects of tiotropium alone with LABAs alone in people with COPD. We allowed co-administration of standard COPD therapy.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion, then extracted data on study quality and outcomes. We contacted study authors and trial sponsors for additional information. We analysed data using the Cochrane Review Manager(RevMan 5.1) software.
MAIN RESULTS
Seven clinical studies totalling 12,223 participants with COPD were included in the review. The studies used similar designs and were generally of good methodological quality. Inclusion criteria for RCTs were similar across the included studies, although studies varied in terms of smoking history and COPD severity of participants. They compared tiotropium (which was delivered by HandiHaler in all studies) with salmeterol (four studies, 8936 participants), formoterol (one study, 431 participants) and indacaterol (two studies, 2856 participants). All participants were instructed to discontinue anticholinergic or long-acting beta(2)-agonist bronchodilators during treatment, but could receive inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) at a stable dose. Study duration ranged from 3 to 12 months. We extracted data for 11,223 participants. In general, the treatment groups were well matched at baseline. Overall, the risk of bias across the included RCTs was low.In the analysis of the primary outcomes in this review, a high level of heterogeneity amongst studies meant that we did not pool data for St George's Respiratory Questionnaire quality of life score. Subgroup analyses based on the type of LABA found statistically significant differences among effects on quality of life depending on whether tiotropium was compared with salmeterol, formoterol or indacaterol. Tiotropium reduced the number of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations compared with LABA (odds ratio (OR) 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79 to 0.93). For this outcome, there was no difference seen among the different types of LABA. There was no statistical difference in mortality observed between the treatment groups.For secondary outcomes, tiotropium was associated with a reduction in the number of COPD exacerbations leading to hospitalisation compared with LABA treatment (OR 0.87; 95% 0.77 to 0.99), but not in the overall rate of all-cause hospitalisations. There was no statistically significant difference in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV(1)) or symptom score between tiotropium and LABA-treated participants. There was a lower rate of non-fatal serious adverse events recorded with tiotropium compared with LABA (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99). The tiotropium group was also associated with a lower rate of study withdrawals (OR 0.89; 95% CI 0.81 to 0.99).We identified six full economic evaluations assessing the cost and cost-effectiveness of tiotropium and salmeterol. The studies were based on an economic model or empirical analysis of clinical data from RCTs. They all looked at maintenance costs and the costs for COPD exacerbations, including respiratory medications and hospitalisations. The setting for the evaluations was primary and secondary care in the UK, Greece, Netherlands, Spain and USA. All the studies estimated tiotropium to be superior to salmeterol based on better clinical outcomes (exacerbations or quality of life) and/or lower total costs. However, the authors of all evaluations reported there was substantial uncertainty around the results.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
In people with COPD, the evidence is equivocal as to whether or not tiotropium offers greater benefit than LABAs in improving quality of life; however, this is complicated by differences in effect among the LABA types. Tiotropium was more effective than LABAs as a group in preventing COPD exacerbations and disease-related hospitalisations, although there were no statistical differences between groups in overall hospitalisation rates or mortality during the study periods. There were fewer serious adverse events and study withdrawals recorded with tiotropium compared with LABAs. Symptom improvement and changes in lung function were similar between the treatment groups. Given the small number of studies to date, with high levels of heterogeneity among them, one approach may be to give a COPD patient a substantial trial of tiotropium, followed by a LABA (or vice versa), then to continue prescribing the long-acting bronchodilator that the patient prefers. Further studies are needed to compare tiotropium with different LABAs, which are currently ongoing. The available economic evidence indicates that tiotropium may be cost-effective compared with salmeterol in several specific settings, but there is considerable uncertainty around this finding.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Albuterol; Bronchodilator Agents; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Disease Progression; Ethanolamines; Formoterol Fumarate; Hospitalization; Humans; Indans; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life; Quinolones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Salmeterol Xinafoate; Scopolamine Derivatives; Tiotropium Bromide
PubMed: 22972134
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009157.pub2 -
Thorax Dec 1999To study the transition from metered dose inhalers using chlorofluorocarbons as propellants (CFC-MDIs) to non-CFC containing devices, a systematic review was conducted... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
To study the transition from metered dose inhalers using chlorofluorocarbons as propellants (CFC-MDIs) to non-CFC containing devices, a systematic review was conducted of clinical trials which compared the delivery of salbutamol and terbutaline via CFC-MDIs and non-CFC devices.
METHODS
Papers were selected by searching electronic databases (Medline, Cochrane, and BIDS) and further information and studies were sought from pharmaceutical companies. The studies were assessed for their methodological quality.
RESULTS
Fifty three relevant trials were identified. Most were scientifically flawed in terms of study design, comparison of inappropriate doses, and insufficient power for the determination of therapeutic equivalence. Differences between inhaler devices were categorised according to efficacy and potency. Most trials claimed to show therapeutic equivalence, usually for the same doses from the different devices. Two commercially available salbutamol metered dose inhalers using a novel hydrofluorocarbon HFC-134a as propellant were equally as potent and efficacious as conventional CFC-MDIs, as were the Rotahaler and Clickhaler dry powder inhalers (DPIs). Evidence suggests that a dose of 200 microg salbutamol via CFC-MDI may be substituted with 200 microg and 400 microg of salbutamol via Accuhaler and Diskhaler DPIs, respectively. Terbutaline delivered via a Turbohaler DPI is equally as potent and efficacious as terbutaline delivered via a conventional CFC-MDI.
CONCLUSIONS
When substituting non-CFC containing inhalers for CFC-MDIs, attention must be given to differences in inhaler characteristics which may result in variations in pulmonary function.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Agonists; Albuterol; Asthma; Chlorofluorocarbons; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Delivery Systems; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Nebulizers and Vaporizers; Peak Expiratory Flow Rate; Terbutaline; Therapeutic Equivalency
PubMed: 10567628
DOI: 10.1136/thx.54.12.1087 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2014Preterm birth, defined as birth between 20 and 36 completed weeks, is a major contributor to perinatal morbidity and mortality globally. Oxytocin receptor antagonists... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Preterm birth, defined as birth between 20 and 36 completed weeks, is a major contributor to perinatal morbidity and mortality globally. Oxytocin receptor antagonists (ORA), such as atosiban, have been specially developed for the treatment of preterm labour. ORA have been proposed as effective tocolytic agents for women in preterm labour to prolong pregnancy with fewer side effects than other tocolytic agents.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects on maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes of tocolysis with ORA for women with preterm labour compared with placebo or any other tocolytic agent.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 December 2013).
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials (published and unpublished) of ORA for tocolysis of labour between 20 and 36 completed weeks' gestation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted trial data. When required, we sought additional data from trial authors. Results are presented as risk ratio (RR) for categorical and mean difference (MD) for continuous data with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate, the number needed to treat for benefit (NNTB) and the number needed to treat for harm (NNTH) were calculated.
MAIN RESULTS
This review update includes eight additional studies (790 women), giving a total of 14 studies involving 2485 women.Four studies (854 women) compared ORA (three used atosiban and one barusiban) with placebo. Three studies were considered at low risk of bias in general (blinded allocation to treatment and intervention), the fourth study did not adequately blind the intervention. No difference was shown in birth less than 48 hours after trial entry (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.43; random-effects, (two studies, 152 women), perinatal mortality (RR 2.25, 95% CI 0.79 to 6.38; two studies, 729 infants), or major neonatal morbidity. ORA (atosiban) resulted in a small reduction in birthweight (MD -138.86 g, 95% CI -250.53 to -27.18; two studies with 676 infants). In one study, atosiban resulted in an increase in extremely preterm birth (before 28 weeks' gestation) (RR 3.11, 95% CI 1.02 to 9.51; NNTH 31, 95% CI 8 to 3188) and infant deaths (up to 12 months) (RR 6.13, 95% CI 1.38 to 27.13; NNTH 28, 95% CI 6 to 377). However, this finding may be confounded due to randomisation of more women with pregnancy less than 26 weeks' gestation to atosiban. ORA also resulted in an increase in maternal adverse drug reactions requiring cessation of treatment in comparison with placebo (RR 4.02, 95% CI 2.05 to 7.85; NNTH 12, 95% CI 5 to 33). No differences were shown in preterm birth less than 37 weeks' gestation or any other adverse neonatal outcomes. No differences were evident by type of ORA, although data were limited.Eight studies (1402 women) compared ORA (atosiban only) with betamimetics; four were considered of low risk of bias (blinded allocation to treatment and to intervention). No statistically significant difference was shown in birth less than 48 hours after trial entry (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.22; eight studies with 1389 women), very preterm birth (RR 1.70, 95% CI 0.89 to 3.23; one study with 145 women), extremely preterm birth (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.92; one study with 244 women) or perinatal mortality (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.48; three studies with 816 infants). One study (80 women), of unclear methodological quality, showed an increase in the interval between trial entry and birth (MD 22.90 days, 95% CI 18.03 to 27.77). No difference was shown in any reported measures of major neonatal morbidity (although numbers were small). ORA (atosiban) resulted in less maternal adverse effects requiring cessation of treatment (RR 0.05, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.11; NNTB 6, 95% CI 6 to 6; five studies with 1161 women).Two studies including (225 women) compared ORA (atosiban) with calcium channel blockers (CCB) (nifedipine only). The studies were considered as having high risk of bias as neither study blinded the intervention and in one study it was not known if allocation was blinded. No difference was shown in birth less than 48 hours after trial entry (average RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.73, random-effects; two studies, 225 women) and extremely preterm birth (RR 2.14, 95% CI 0.20 to 23.11; one study, 145 women). No data were available for the outcome of perinatal mortality. One small trial (145 women), which did not employ blinding of the intervention, showed an increase in the number of preterm births (before 37 weeks' gestation) (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.13 to 2.14; NNTH 5, 95% CI 3 to 19), a lower gestational age at birth (MD -1.20 weeks, 95% CI -2.15 to -0.25) and an increase in admission to neonatal intensive care unit (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.47; NNTH 5, 95% CI 3 to 20). ORA (atosiban) resulted in less maternal adverse effects (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.68; NNTB 6, 95% CI 5 to 12; two studies, 225 women) but not maternal adverse effects requiring cessation of treatment (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.62; one study, 145 women). No longer-term outcome data were included.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review did not demonstrate superiority of ORA (largely atosiban) as a tocolytic agent compared with placebo, betamimetics or CCB (largely nifedipine) in terms of pregnancy prolongation or neonatal outcomes, although ORA was associated with less maternal adverse effects than treatment with the CCB or betamimetics. The finding of an increase in infant deaths and more births before completion of 28 weeks of gestation in one placebo-controlled study warrants caution. However, the number of women enrolled at very low gestations was small. Due to limitations of small numbers studied and methodological quality, further well-designed randomised controlled trials are needed. Further comparisons of ORA versus CCB (which has a better side-effect profile than betamimetics) are needed. Consideration of further placebo-controlled studies seems warranted. Future studies of tocolytic agents should measure all important short- and long-term outcomes for women and infants, and costs.
Topics: Albuterol; Female; Humans; Infant, Extremely Low Birth Weight; Infant, Newborn; Obstetric Labor, Premature; Oligopeptides; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Receptors, Oxytocin; Ritodrine; Terbutaline; Tocolytic Agents; Vasotocin
PubMed: 24903678
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004452.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2000Inhaled beta2-adrenergic agonists delivered by inhalation are very widely used in asthma. There has been much controversy of the use and possible consequences of the use... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Inhaled beta2-adrenergic agonists delivered by inhalation are very widely used in asthma. There has been much controversy of the use and possible consequences of the use of these agents for regular, as opposed as-needed use in asthma.
OBJECTIVES
This review to assessed the clinical trial evidence to test whether using regular use of short-acting beta2-agonists reduced asthma control and pulmonary function; worsened symptoms, airway reactivity and quality of life; and increased the rate of exacerbations.
SEARCH STRATEGY
A search was carried out of the Cochrane Airways Group "Asthma and Wheez* RCT" register using the terms: regular AND [beta agonist OR bronchodilator OR salbutamol OR albuterol Or terbutaline OR isoproterenol OR reproterol OR fenoterol]. Bibliographies of existing trials were searched and primary trial authors and pharmaceutical companies were approached for additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials in which the short-acting beta2-agonist was given regularly in the experimental group, together with an inhaled bronchodilator for relief of symptoms ('rescue use'). The control group consisted of matching placebo inhaled regularly, with an inhaled bronchodilator for as-needed 'rescue use'.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Data were extracted and quality assessments were made by both reviewers. Parallel group and cross-over trials were analysed separately. Where possible data were pooled using a fixed effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
Over 800 abstracts were identified, following a review, 60 papers were requested for full assessment by both reviewers. 34 trials from 30 papers met the entry criteria. Data from 31 outcomes were analyzable. There was little difference between the treatments for nearly all outcomes. In cross-over studies, evening peak flow was better with regular treatment, weighted mean difference (WMD) 13.1 l/min (95% confidence interval 24.3, 1.9). In contrast, the FEV1 was better with as-needed treatment (WMD 157 ml (95% CI: 123, 192). Bronchial hyper reactivity was slightly better in the as-needed group, standardised mean difference 0.23, 95% CI: 0.52, 1.12.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
These results support current guidelines. There is little advantage in using short-acting beta2-agonists regularly, and potentially some small clinical disadvantage.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Agonists; Asthma; Drug Administration Schedule; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 11034709
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001285 -
Integrative Medicine Research 2021This rapid review systematically evaluated the effects of honeybee products compared to controls for the prevention, duration, severity, and recovery of acute viral... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This rapid review systematically evaluated the effects of honeybee products compared to controls for the prevention, duration, severity, and recovery of acute viral respiratory tract infections (RTIs), including SARS-CoV-2, in adults and children.
METHODS
Cochrane rapid review methods were applied. Four English databases plus preprint servers and trial registries were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The evidence was appraised and synthesized using RoB 2.0 and GRADE.
RESULTS
27 results were derived from 9 RCTs that included 674 adults and 781 children. In hospitalized adults with SARS-CoV-2, propolis plus usual-care compared to usual-care alone reduced the risk of shock, respiratory failure and kidney injury and duration of hospital admission. Honey was less effective than Guaifenesin for reducing cough severity at 60-minutes in adults with non-specific acute viral RTIs. Compared to coffee, honey plus coffee, and honey alone reduced the severity of post-infectious cough in adults. Honey reduced the duration of cough in children compared to placebo and salbutamol; and the global impact of nocturnal cough after one night compared to usual-care alone and pharmaceutical cough medicines.
CONCLUSION
More studies are needed to robustly assess honeybee's role in SARS-CoV-2 and non-specific viral respiratory infections.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO: CRD42020193847.
PubMed: 34611512
DOI: 10.1016/j.imr.2021.100779 -
Respiratory Research Feb 2015Fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) 100/25 mcg is a once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta2 agonist (LABA) treatment approved in the United... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Fluticasone furoate (FF)/vilanterol (VI) 100/25 mcg is a once-daily inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting beta2 agonist (LABA) treatment approved in the United States, Canada and Europe for the long-term maintenance therapy of COPD. We report data from mixed treatment comparisons (MTC) of once-daily FF/VI against established twice-daily ICS/LABA combination therapies on clinical efficacy outcomes.
METHODS
Data from 33 parallel-group randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ICS/LABAs, of ≥8 weeks' duration in patients ≥12 years of age with COPD, identified by systematic review, were analysed using covariate-adjusted Bayesian hierarchical models for three efficacy outcomes. Lung function, assessed by change from baseline in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), was the outcome of primary interest (n = 28 studies). Secondary objectives were assessment of annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations (n = 15) and patient-reported health status, measured by change from baseline in St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) Total score (n = 20). Overall, 25 different treatments were included in the MTC; we report findings, including probabilities of non-inferiority, for comparisons of once-daily FF/VI 100/25 mcg with twice-daily fluticasone propionate (FP)/salmeterol (SAL) 500/50 mcg and budesonide (BUD)/formoterol (FORM) 400/12 mcg.
RESULTS
For FEV1, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated >99% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg using a 50 mL margin. For annual rate of moderate/severe exacerbations, FF/VI 100/25 mcg demonstrated 73% and 77% probability of non-inferiority to FP/SAL 500/50 mcg and BUD/FORM 400/12 mcg, respectively, using a 10% rate ratio margin. For SGRQ Total score, the corresponding probabilities of non-inferiority were 99% and 98%, respectively, on a 2-unit margin. Significant covariate effects were identified: increased age was associated with deterioration in FEV1 and reduced exacerbation frequency; shorter study duration was associated with reduced exacerbation frequency.
CONCLUSIONS
FF/VI 100/25 mcg was comparable with corresponding doses of FP/SAL and BUD/FORM on lung function and health status outcomes. Non-inferiority on moderate/severe exacerbation rate was not demonstrated to the same degree of confidence, though observed rates were similar. Model limitations include a weak treatment network for the exacerbation analysis and variability across the included studies. Our data support previous RCT findings suggesting that the efficacy of FF/VI 100/25 mcg on lung function and health status in COPD is comparable with twice-daily ICS/LABAs.
Topics: Administration, Inhalation; Adrenal Cortex Hormones; Adrenergic beta-2 Receptor Agonists; Aged; Androstadienes; Bayes Theorem; Benzyl Alcohols; Bronchodilator Agents; Budesonide, Formoterol Fumarate Drug Combination; Chlorobenzenes; Disease Progression; Drug Administration Schedule; Female; Fluticasone-Salmeterol Drug Combination; Forced Expiratory Volume; Humans; Lung; Male; Middle Aged; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recovery of Function; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25849223
DOI: 10.1186/s12931-015-0184-8 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2002Wheeze is a common symptom in infancy and is a common cause for both primary care consultations and hospital admission. Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists (b2-agonists) are the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Wheeze is a common symptom in infancy and is a common cause for both primary care consultations and hospital admission. Beta2-adrenoceptor agonists (b2-agonists) are the most frequently used as bronchodilator but their efficacy is questionable.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness of b2-agonist for the treatment of infants with recurrent and persistent wheeze.
SEARCH STRATEGY
Relevant trials were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group database (CENTRAL), Medline and Pubmed. The database search used the following terms: Wheeze or asthma and Infant or Child and Short acting beta-agonist or Salbutamol (variants), Albuterol, Terbutaline (variants), Orciprenaline, Fenoterol
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials comparing the effect of b2-agonist against placebo in children under 2 years of age who had had two or more previous episodes of wheeze, not related to another form of chronic lung disease.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Eight studies met the criteria for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The studies investigated patients in three settings: at home (3 studies), in hospital (2 studies) and in the pulmonary function laboratory (3 studies). The main outcome measure was change in respiratory rate except for community based studies where symptom scores were used.
MAIN RESULTS
The studies were markedly heterogeneous and between study comparisons were limited. Improvement in respiratory rate, symptom score and oxygen saturation were noted in one study in the emergency department following two salbutamol nebulisers but this had no impact on hospital admission. There was a reduction in bronchial reactivity following salbutamol. There was no significant benefit from taking regular inhaled salbutamol on symptom scores recorded at home.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
There is no clear benefit of using b2-agonists in the management of recurrent wheeze in the first two years of life although there is conflicting evidence. At present, further studies should only be performed if the patient group can be clearly defined and there is a suitable outcome parameter capable of measuring a response.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Agonists; Humans; Infant; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recurrence; Respiratory Sounds
PubMed: 12137663
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002873