Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Tambahan intravena beta2‐agonis kepada beta2‐agonis sedutan untuk asma akut

Abstract

disponible en

Background

Inhaled beta‐agonist therapy is central to the management of acute asthma. This review evaluates the benefit of an additional use of intravenous beta2‐agonist agents.

Objectives

To determine the benefit of adding intravenous (IV) beta2‐agonists to inhaled beta2‐agonist therapy for acute asthma treated in the emergency department.

Search methods

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Register which is a compilation of systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL as well as handsearching of 20 respiratory journals. Bibliographies from included studies and known reviews were also searched. Primary authors and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies. The search was performed in September 2012.

Selection criteria

Only RCTs were considered for inclusion. Studies were included if patients presented to the emergency department with acute asthma and were treated with IV beta2‐agonists with inhaled beta2‐agonist therapy and existing standard treatments versus inhaled beta2‐agonists and existing standard treatments.

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors independently extracted data and confirmed their findings with corresponding authors of trials. We obtained missing data from authors or calculated from data present in the papers. We used fixed‐effect model for odds ratios (OR) and for mean differences (MD) we used both fixed‐effect and random‐effects models and reported 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Main results

From 109 potentially relevant studies only three (104 patients) met our inclusion criteria: Bogie 2007 (46 children), Browne 1997 (29 children) and Nowak 2010 (29 adults). Bogie 2007 investigated the addition of intravenous terbutaline to high dose nebulised albuterol in children with acute severe asthma, requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Browne 1997 investigated the benefit of adding intravenous salbutamol to inhaled salbutamol in children with acute severe asthma in the emergency department. Nowak 2010 investigated addition of IV bedoradrine to standard care (nebulised albuterol, ipratropium and oral corticosteroids) among adults, and was reported as a conference abstract only.

There was no significant advantage (OR 0.29; 95%CI 0.06 to 1.38, one trial, 29 adults) for adding IV bedoradrine to standard care (nebulised albuterol, ipratropium and oral corticosteroids) with regard to hospitalisation rates.

Various outcome indicators for the length of stay were reported among the trials. Browne 1997 reported a significantly shorter recovery time (in terms of cessation of 30 minute salbutamol) for children in the IV salbutamol with inhaled salbutamol group (four hours) versus the 11.1 hours for the inhaled salbutamol group (P = 0.03). Time to cessation of hourly nebuliser was also significantly shorter (P = 0.02) for the IV plus inhaled salbutamol group (11.5 hours versus 21.2 hours), and they were ready for emergency patient discharge on average 9.7 hours earlier than the inhaled salbutamol group (P < 0.05). In a paediatric ICU study Bogie 2007 reported no significant advantage in length of paediatric ICU admission (hours) for adding IV terbutaline to nebulised albuterol (MD ‐12.95, 95% CI: ‐38.74, 12.84).

Browne 1997 reported there were only six out of 14 children with a pulmonary index score above six in the IV plus inhaled salbutamol group at two hours compared with 14 of the 15 in the inhaled salbutamol group (P = 0.02)

In Browne 1997 there was a higher proportion of tremor in the IV plus inhaled salbutamol group than in the inhaled salbutamol group (P < 0.02). Nowak 2010 did not report any statistically significant adverse effects associated with adding IV bedoradrine to standard care (nebulised albuterol, ipratropium and oral corticosteroids). Troponin levels were elevated in three children in the IV terbutaline + nebulised albuterol group at 12 and 24 hours in Bogie 2007

Authors' conclusions

There is very limited evidence from one study (Browne 1997) to support the use of IV beta2‐agonists in children with severe acute asthma with respect to shorter recovery time, and similarly there is limited evidence (again from one study Browne 1997) suggesting benefit with regard to pulmonary index scores; however this advantage needs to be considered carefully in relation to the increased side effects associated with IV beta2‐agonists. We identified no significant benefits for adults with severe acute asthma. Until more, adequately powered, high quality clinical trials in this area are conducted it is not possible to form a robust evaluation of the addition of IV beta2‐agonists in children or adults with severe acute asthma.

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.

Plain language summary

Tambahanintravena beta2‐agonis kepada beta2‐agonis sedutan untuk asma akut

Ubat beta2‐agonis digunakan untuk rawatan asma dan bertindak membuka saluran pernafasan untuk membantu pesakit bernafas dengan lebih mudah.  Beta2‐agonis boleh diberi kepada pesakit dengan dua cara berbeza ‐ secara intravena (terus melalui vena) dan melalui penyedut.  Penyedut adalah salah satu rawatan paling penting untuk pesakit asma akut yang teruk. Ulasan ini mempertimbangkan soalan samada rawatan boleh menambahkan manfaat jika pesakit menerima ubat menggunakan kedua‐dua cara (melalui bernafas menggunakan penyedut dan menerimanya terus melalui vena) berbanding dengan hanya menyedutnya sahaja. Ulasan ini meneliti kesemua kajian rawak terkawal ke atas penggunaan intravena beta2‐agonis sebagai tambahan kepada sedutan beta2‐agonis dengan penjagaan standard sedia ada (seperti steroid sama ada diambil sebagai pil atau suntikan) dalam asma akut yang teruk.   

Kami menemui tiga kajian melibatkan 104 pesakit (75 kanak‐kanak dan 29 dewasa) dengan asma akut. Tiada perbezaan signifikan dalam kalangan dewasa yang menerima beta‐agonis intravena dan juga penjagaan standard dalam satu kajian kecil yang melihat perbandingan ini. Kami juga melihat tempoh masa berada di jabatan kecemasan. Dua kajian melaporkan masa pemulihan yang lebih singkat atau discaj yang lebih cepat daripada jabatan kecemasan bagi pesakit yang juga menerima beta‐agoni intravena. Satu kajian melaporkan lebih ramai kanak‐kanak mengalami geletar jika mereka diberi suntikan beta‐agonis manakala dalam kajian lain dengan orang dewasa, melaporkan tiada perbezaan signifikan dalam kesan buruk. Oleh kerana bilangan kajian adalah kecil dan bilangan pesakit juga sangat kecil kami tidak dapat tentukan kebolehpercayaan penemuan ini.

Sehingga lebih banyak kajian klinikal yang berkualiti tinggi dilaksanakan dalam hal ini ulasan ini tidak dapat menentukan sama ada terdapat peningkatan manfaat menggunakan tambahan beta2‐agonis intravena dalam kalangan kanak‐kanak atau dewasa dengan asma akut yang teruk berbanding beta2‐agonis sedutan sahaja.