系統性回顧 related to this topic

loading
2 References (2 articles) loading Revert Studify

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 Annals of internal medicine
Year 2020
Loading references information
BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is characterized by frequent exacerbations. PURPOSE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness and adverse events (AEs) of pharmacologic interventions for adults with exacerbation of COPD. DATA SOURCES: English-language searches of several bibliographic sources from database inception to 2 January 2019. STUDY SELECTION: 68 randomized controlled trials that enrolled adults with exacerbation of COPD treated in out- or inpatient settings other than intensive care and compared pharmacologic therapies with placebo, "usual care," or other pharmacologic interventions. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently extracted data and rated study quality and strength of evidence (SOE). DATA SYNTHESIS: Compared with placebo or management without antibiotics, antibiotics given for 3 to 14 days were associated with increased exacerbation resolution at the end of the intervention (odds ratio [OR], 2.03 [95% CI, 1.47 to 2.80]; moderate SOE) and less treatment failure at the end of the intervention (OR, 0.54 [CI, 0.34 to 0.86]; moderate SOE), independent of severity of exacerbations in out- and inpatients. Compared with placebo in out- and inpatients, systemic corticosteroids given for 9 to 56 days were associated with less treatment failure at the end of the intervention (OR, 0.01 [CI, 0.00 to 0.13]; low SOE) but also with a higher number of total and endocrine-related AEs. Compared with placebo or usual care in inpatients, other pharmacologic interventions (aminophyllines, magnesium sulfate, anti-inflammatory agents, inhaled corticosteroids, and short-acting bronchodilators) had insufficient evidence, showing either no or inconclusive effects (with the exception of the mucolytic erdosteine) or improvement only in lung function. LIMITATION: Scant evidence for many interventions; several studies had unclear or high risk of bias and inadequate reporting of AEs. CONCLUSION: Antibiotics and systemic corticosteroids reduce treatment failure in adults with mild to severe exacerbation of COPD. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (PROSPERO: CRD42018111609).

Systematic review

Unclassified

期刊 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Year 2012
Loading references information
背景:哮喘是一种慢性疾病,患者可能有偶尔或经常加重,急诊科(ED)的访问。氨茶碱已广泛用于治疗急性加重哮喘急性发作的设置,但是,它的作用还不清楚,特别是与任何额外的好处时,吸入β2-受体激动剂。 目的:确定在哮喘急性发作治疗的ED设置的成人患者静脉注射氨茶碱吸入β2-受体激动剂增加的幅度的影响。 搜索方法:我们确定了试验科克伦航空集团寄存器(来自MEDLINE,EMBASE,CINAHL标准化的搜索),手工呼吸杂志和会议摘要。两个独立的审查筛选,并获得了可能相关的文章和手工检索书目清单的其他文章。在原来的版本在2000年发表的这篇评论我们的数据库搜索到1999年。经修订的搜索从成立到2012年9月更新了2012年的审查。 选择标准:氨茶碱静脉滴注的与安慰剂相比,在成人急性哮喘和吸入β2-受体激动剂治疗的随机对照试验比较。我们包括带或不带皮质激素或其他支气管扩张剂的随机处理,这是不属于治疗的患者。 数据收集和分析:两位评价作者独立提取数据,并检讨笔者输入的数据录入RevMan,这是第二次审查作者检查。结果以均数差(MD)或比值比(OR)和95%可信区间(CI)。 主要结果:15研究被列入审查在以前的版本,我们在本次更新包含了两个新的研究,尽管我们无法池新的数据。总体而言,质量的研究是温和的,被评定为7例(45%)的试验显然是足够的隐蔽性分配。有显着的临床异质性之间的剂量氨茶碱等药物,在哮喘急性发作的严重程度不同研究之间的研究,。 有没有统计学上显着的优势时加入氨茶碱静脉滴注入院(OR 0.58,95%CI 0.30〜1.12;研究; N = 315)。在2000年被发现,有没有统计上的显着效果,氨茶碱在​​任何时间内对气流的结果,另外两项试验在2012年还没有这样的结论提出质疑。与氨茶碱,β2-受体激动剂治疗的人也有类似的呼气峰流速(PEF)值相比那些仅与β2-受体激动剂治疗后12 h(MD 8.30 L /分钟,95%CI为-20.69至37.29 L /分钟)或(MD预测-1.21%,-14.21%至11.78%预计值的95%CI)和24小时(MD 22.20 L /分钟,95%CI为-56.65至101.05 L /分钟)。进行分组研究,根据平均基线气流受限(11项研究)和使用任何糖皮质激素(9个研究)两个亚组分析。基线气流受限或使用糖皮质激素,氨茶碱的效果有没有关系。氨茶碱治疗的患者心悸/心律失常(OR 3.02,95%CI为1.15至7.90;研究N = 249)和呕吐(OR 4.21,95%CI 2.20〜8.07;研究N = 321),但是,没有显着差异,在震颤(OR 2.60,95%CI为0.62〜11.02; 5项研究,n = 249)。 评价者结论:氨茶碱静脉滴注的使用并不会造成显着的额外支气管扩张遇到哮喘发作在ED的设置,或在显着减少的风险入院的病人标准护理吸入β2-受体激动剂。每100人用氨茶碱治疗,20人出现呕吐和15人的心律不齐或心悸。氨茶碱无子组中,可能会更有效。与原来的结论氨茶碱静脉滴注的风险 - 收益平衡是不利的,我们在2012年的更新是一致的。