-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2003Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (or asthma) following strenuous physical exertion is common and can cause sub-optimal performance, symptoms such as cough, dyspnea,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Exercise-induced bronchoconstriction (or asthma) following strenuous physical exertion is common and can cause sub-optimal performance, symptoms such as cough, dyspnea, wheeze, chest tightness, and can lead people to avoid physical activity. Management focuses on prevention with pre-exercise treatment using various pharmacologic agents. Mast cell stabilizing agents are effective in attenuating exercise-induced bronchoconstriction but their effectiveness compared to bronchodilator agents is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To quantitatively compare the effects of inhaling a single dose of either mast cell stabiliser - nedocromil sodium or sodium cromoglycate - to a single dose of short acting beta-agonists or anti-cholinergic agents - atropine or ipratropium bromide - prior to a strenuous exercise challenge in participants with asthma who are at least 6 years of age and suffer from reproducible exercise-induced bronchoconstriction. The review also compares the effects between a short acting beta-agonist alone to a combination of a short acting beta-agonist + mast cell stabiliser.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group ASTHMA and WHEEZ* trials register, Cochrane CENTRAL, Current Contents, review articles, textbooks and reference lists of articles. We also contacted the drug manufacturer and primary authors for additional citations.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials comparing a single prophylactic dose of a mast cell stabiliser to a short acting beta-agonist, anti-cholinergic agent, or a short acting beta-agonist alone to a combination of short acting beta-agonist plus a mast cell stabiliser to prevent exercise-induced bronchoconstriction in asthmatics over six years old. The exercise challenge had to conform to acceptable standards and pulmonary function (PFT) reported as percent decrease from baseline of FEV1 or peak flow. Complete protection (maximum % fall PFT <15% post-exercise) and clinical protection (50% improvement over placebo effect) measures were included.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Trial inclusion and quality assessments were conducted independently by two reviewers using standardised forms. A second reviewer confirmed data extraction and calculations. Attempts were made to contact study authors. The pooled estimate involving continuous pulmonary function measures are reported as a weighted mean difference (WMD), dichotomous data as an odds ratio (OR), both with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) using a random effects model. Heterogeneity tests for pooled results were performed.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty-four trials (518 participants) conducted in 13 countries between 1976 and 1998 were included. All drugs were effective at attenuating the exercise-induced bronchoconstriction response but to varying degrees even within the same individual. Compared to anti-cholinergic agents, mast cell stabilisers were somewhat more effective at attenuating bronchoconstriction. On average the maximum fall on MCS was reduced to 7.1% compared to 13.8% on AC ( WMD = 6.7%; 95% CI: 3.3 to 10.0), provided more individuals with complete protection (73% vs 56%; OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.3 to 3.7) and clinical protection (73% vs 52%; OR = 2.7; 95% CI: 1.1 to 6.4). There were no subgroup differences based on age, severity, or study quality, and no adverse effects were reported for either agent group. When compared to short acting beta-agonists mast cell stabilisers were not as effective at preventing deterioration. On average the maximum fall on MCS was 11.2% compared to 4.3% on beta agonists ( WMD = 6.8%; 95% CI: 4.5 to 9.2). MCS provided fewer individuals with complete protection (66% vs 85%; OR = 0.3; 95% CI: 0.2 to 0.5) or clinical protection (55% vs 77%; OR = 0.4; 95% CI: 0.2 to 0.8). There were no significant subgroup differences based on age, severity, drug, delivery, or study quality. A non-significant difference in side effects was demonstrated with 11% of short acting beta-agonist patients experiencing side effects compared to 3% of those receiving mast cell stabilisers (OR = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.0 to 8.2). Combining masta-agonist patients experiencing side effects compared to 3% of those receiving mast cell stabilisers (OR = 0.2; 95% CI: 0.0 to 8.2). Combining mast cell stabilisers with a short acting beta-agonist did not produce significant advantages to pulmonary function over short acting beta-agonists alone. On average the maximum fall on SABA only was reduced to 5.3% compared to 3.5% on the combination ( WMD = 1.8%; 95% CI: -1.1 to 4.6). Beta-agonists alone provided fewer individuals with complete protection (68% vs 80%; OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.2 to 1.4) or clinical protection (70% vs 86%; OR=0.4; 95% CI: 0.1 to 1.2) but the difference did not reach significance (p=0.17). There were no subgroup differences.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
In a population of stable asthmatics short acting beta-agonists, mast cell stabilisers, or anticholinergics will provide a significant protective effect against exercise-induced bronchoconstriction with few adverse effects. On average, SABAs resulted in more effective attenuation than mast cell stabilisers, while mast cell stabilisers were more effective than anti-cholinergic agents. Combining SABA and mast cell stabilisers may be appropriate in selected cases. The variability in the individual degree of response to these drugs in multi arm trials suggests clinicians and patients work together to identify the most effective prophylactic therapy.
Topics: Adrenergic beta-Agonists; Adult; Asthma, Exercise-Induced; Bronchoconstriction; Child; Cholinergic Antagonists; Humans; Mast Cells; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 14583951
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002307 -
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management Feb 2018Dying patients commonly experience potentially distressing symptoms. Palliative care guidelines recommend opioids, anticholinergics, antipsychotics, and benzodiazepines...
CONTEXT
Dying patients commonly experience potentially distressing symptoms. Palliative care guidelines recommend opioids, anticholinergics, antipsychotics, and benzodiazepines for symptom relief.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this study was to systematically review the effectiveness and safety of palliative drug treatment in the last days of life of adult patients, focusing on the management of pain, dyspnea, anxiety, restlessness, and death rattle.
METHODS
A systematic search of the literature was published before December 2016 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov, and SveMed+. Studies on safety or effectiveness of drug therapy in dying adults with at least one outcome on symptom control, adverse effects, or survival were included. Data for included studies were extracted. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Quality assessment tool for quantitative studies.
RESULTS
Of the 5940 unique titles identified, 12 studies met the inclusion criteria. Five studies assessed anticholinergics for death rattle, providing no evidence that scopolamine hydrobromide and atropine were superior to placebo. Five studies examined drugs for dyspnea, anxiety, or terminal restlessness, providing some evidence supporting the use of morphine and midazolam. Two studies examined opioids for pain, providing some support for morphine, diamorphine, and fentanyl. Eight studies included safety outcomes, revealing no important differences in adverse effects between the interventions and no evidence for midazolam shortening survival.
CONCLUSION
There is a lack of evidence concerning the effectiveness and safety of palliative drug treatment in dying patients, and the reviewed evidence provides limited guidance for clinicians to assist in a distinct and significant phase of life.
Topics: Drug Therapy; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Palliative Care; Terminal Care
PubMed: 28803078
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.06.010 -
Cureus Mar 2020Introduction The benefits of atropine in the treatment of acute organophosphate (OP) poisoning has been well established, while that of oximes is still uncertain....
Introduction The benefits of atropine in the treatment of acute organophosphate (OP) poisoning has been well established, while that of oximes is still uncertain. Pralidoxime is the most often used oxime worldwide. In vitro experiments have consistently shown that oximes are effective reactivators of human acetylcholinesterase enzyme, inhibited by OP compounds. However, the clinical benefit of pralidoxime is still unclear. A recent meta-analysis has found that pralidoxime provides no significant improvement in outcome and rather may cause harm while increasing the economic burden in low-income communities where its use is the most prevalent. Objectives This study aimed to provide an updated evaluation of the efficacy of pralidoxime in addition to atropine alone in the treatment of patients with acute OP poisoning in terms of mortality, need for ventilator support, and the incidence of intermediate syndrome. The intermediate syndrome is a clinical syndrome that occurs 24 to 96 hours after the ingestion of an OP compound and is characterized by prominent weakness of neck flexors, muscles of respiration, and proximal limb muscles. Materials and methods We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases until January 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the English language that evaluated the use of pralidoxime in individuals of any age, gender or nationality presenting with an alleged history of OP intake. The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were the need for ventilator support and the incidence of intermediate syndrome. The risk of bias in included studies was assessed using the tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook of Systematic Review of Interventions. Treatment/control differences in these outcomes across included studies were combined using risk ratios (RR). Results Six randomized controlled trials (n = 646) fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including one further trial missed from the most recent systematic review. The risk of bias varied across studies, with Eddleston 2009 being of the lowest risk and Cherian 2005 being of high risk. The risk of mortality (RR = 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 2.41, P = 0.07) and the need for ventilator support (RR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.71, P = 0.08) were not significantly different between the pralidoxime and the control group. There was a significant increase in the incidence of intermediate syndrome in the pralidoxime group (RR = 1.63; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.62, P = 0.04). Conclusions Based on our meta-analysis of the available RCTs, pralidoxime was not shown to be beneficial in patients with acute OP poisoning. Our findings are consistent with the other literature.
PubMed: 32257715
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.7174 -
World Journal of Critical Care Medicine Feb 2015To investigate the diagnostic yield, therapeutic efficacy, and rate of adverse events related to flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FFB) in critically ill children.
AIM
To investigate the diagnostic yield, therapeutic efficacy, and rate of adverse events related to flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FFB) in critically ill children.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, OVID, and EMBASE databases through July 2014 for English language publications studying FFB performed in the intensive care unit in children < 18 years old. We identified 666 studies, of which 89 full-text studies were screened for further review. Two reviewers independently determined that 27 of these studies met inclusion criteria and extracted data. We examined the diagnostic yield of FFB among upper and lower airway evaluations, as well as the utility of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL).
RESULTS
We found that FFB led to a change in medical management in 28.9% (range 21.9%-69.2%) of critically ill children. The diagnostic yield of FFB was 82% (range 45.2%-100%). Infectious organisms were identified in 25.7% (17.6%-75%) of BALs performed, resulting in a change of antimicrobial management in 19.1% (range: 12.2%-75%). FFB successfully re-expanded atelectasis or removed mucus plugs in 60.3% (range: 23.8%-100%) of patients with atelectasis. Adverse events were reported in 12.9% (range: 0.5%-71.4%) of patients. The most common adverse effects of FFB were transient hypotension, hypoxia and/or bradycardia that resolved with minimal intervention, such as oxygen supplementation or removal of the bronchoscope. Serious adverse events were uncommon; 2.1% of adverse events required intervention such as bag-mask ventilation or intubation and atropine for hypoxia and bradycardia, normal saline boluses for hypotension, or lavage and suctioning for hemorrhage.
CONCLUSION
FFB is safe and effective for diagnostic and therapeutic use in critically ill pediatric patients.
PubMed: 25685726
DOI: 10.5492/wjccm.v4.i1.77 -
Clinical Case Reports Nov 2019Clozapine is considered the golden standard in the treatment of therapy-resistant schizophrenia; however, it associated with bothersome side effects such as sialorrhea....
Clozapine is considered the golden standard in the treatment of therapy-resistant schizophrenia; however, it associated with bothersome side effects such as sialorrhea. Current evidence suggests that the sublingual use of atropine seems to be safe and effective and could be considered as a first-line treatment of clozapine-induced sialorrhea.
PubMed: 31788260
DOI: 10.1002/ccr3.2431