Treatments in respiratory medicine最新文献

Neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) remains one of the major causes of neonatal mortality and morbidity despite advances in perinatal care. The initial management of infants with RDS has almost become 'too routine' with little thought about the pathophysiological processes that lead to the disease and how the clinician can use the existing therapeutic interventions to optimize care. The transition from fetus to infant involves many complex adaptations at birth; the most important is the function of the lungs as a gas exchange organ. Preterm surfactant-deficient infants are less well equipped to deal with this transition. Optimum gas exchange is achieved through matching of ventilation and perfusion. In RDS, ventilation may be affected by homogeneity of the airways with atelectasis and over distension, as hyaline membranes block small airways. In turn this contributes to the inflammation that becomes bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Exogenous surfactant given early, particularly with positive end-expiratory pressure and, where necessary, gentle ventilation, would seem to be the optimum way to prevent atelectasis. How this can be achieved in neonates after surfactant therapy is explored through a review of the normal physiology of the newborn lung and how this is affected by RDS. The therapeutic interventions of resuscitation, exogenous surfactant, ventilation and inhaled nitric oxide are discussed in relation to their effects and what are currently the optimum ways to use these. It is hoped that with a better understanding of the normal physiology in the newborn lung, and the effects of both disease and interventions on that physiology, the practising clinician will have a greater appreciation of management of preterm infants with, or at risk of, RDS.

Introduction: Bronchiectasis is a chronic pulmonary process characterized by recurrent respiratory infections leading to destruction of airways secondary to inflammation. We investigated whether the addition of 6-months' twice-weekly azithromycin to the existing treatment regimen in patients with pulmonary bronchiectasis decreased the number of exacerbations and improved pulmonary function compared with a similar period of time without concurrent azithromycin.

Methods: Thirty patients with high-resolution computed tomography scan-confirmed bronchiectasis were to be recruited. In random order, patients received usual medications for 6 months, and usual medications plus oral azithromycin 500mg twice weekly for 6 months. Patients receiving azithromycin first had a 1-month washout period prior to entering the second phase. Patients recorded weekly peak flow (PF) measurements. Pulmonary function tests (PFTs), 24-hour sputum volume, and needs for intervention with medication or ancillary support were collected at baseline and every 3 months. Exacerbation incidence and sputum volume measurements were compared from baseline to the end of each study phase.

Results: Twelve patients were enrolled; 11 were included in the analysis. Owing to randomization, most patients received the azithromycin first, which was fairly well tolerated. PFTs did not change significantly during either study phase and PFs appeared to remain stable during azithromycin therapy and throughout the subsequent control phase. Azithromycin significantly decreased the incidence of exacerbations compared with usual medications (5 vs 16; p = 0.019). Mean 24-hour sputum volume significantly decreased (15% [p = 0.005]) during the active treatment phase, and remained decreased during the control phase (p = 0.028). Subjectively, patients reported increased energy and quality of life while receiving treatment with azithromycin.

Conclusions: The addition of twice-weekly azithromycin significantly decreased the incidence of exacerbation and 24-hour sputum volume and may have stabilized the PFTs and PFs in this 11-patient pilot study. The results of this study justify further investigation of adding azithromycin to the treatment regimens of patients with bronchiectasis for its disease-modifying effects.

Study objectives: To compare the efficacy and safety of oral azithromycin 500 mg once daily for 3 days with those of oral clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 10 days.

Design: Randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter study.

Setting: Seventy-six study centers in eight countries (Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, India, South Africa, and USA).

Patients: Three hundred and twenty-two adult outpatients with acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis (AECB) as documented by increased cough or sputum production, worsening dyspnea, and purulent sputum production.

Interventions: Randomization 1 : 1 to azithromycin 500 mg once daily for 3 days or clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily for 10 days.

Results: The primary efficacy endpoint was clinical response at day 21-24, or test of cure (TOC) visit in the modified intent-to-treat (MITT) analysis (n = 318 patients). The TOC clinical cure rates in the MITT population were equivalent in the two treatment groups at 85% with azithromycin and 82% with clarithromycin (95% CI -5.9%, 12.0%). Clinical success rates on day 10-12 were also equivalent at 93% with azithromycin and 94% with clarithromycin (95% CI -7.9%, 4.4%). Clinical cure rates at TOC by pathogen were equivalent for the two treatment groups for Haemophilus influenzae (azithromycin, 85.7%; clarithromycin, 87.5%), Moraxella catarrhalis (91.7% and 80.0%, respectively) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (90.6% and 77.8%, respectively). Bacteriologic success rates were also equivalent between the azithromycin and clarithromycin treatment groups at TOC for S. pneumoniae (90.6% and 85.2%, respectively), H. influenzae (71.4% and 81.3%, respectively) and M. catarrhalis (100% and 86.7%, respectively). The overall incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar in the azithromycin and clarithromycin groups (20.9% and 26.8%, respectively), with the most common being abdominal pain (6.3% and 6.1%, respectively), diarrhea (4.4% and 5.5%, respectively), and nausea (4.4% and 3.7%, respectively).

Conclusions: Three-day treatment with azithromycin 500 mg once daily is equivalent to a 10-day treatment with clarithromycin 500 mg twice daily in adult patients with AECB.

Cefditoren pivoxil (Spectracef, Meiact) is a third-generation oral cephalosporin with a broad spectrum of activity against pathogens, including both Gram-positive and -negative bacteria, and is stable to hydrolysis by many common beta-lactamases. Cefditoren pivoxil is approved for use in the treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB), mild-to-moderate community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), acute maxillary sinusitis, acute pharyngitis/tonsillitis, and uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections (indications may differ between countries). In clinical trials in adults and adolescents, cefditoren pivoxil demonstrated good clinical and bacteriological efficacy in AECB, CAP, acute maxillary sinusitis, acute pharyngitis/tonsillitis, and uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections, and was generally well tolerated. Thus, cefditoren pivoxil is a good option for the treatment of adult and adolescent patients with specific respiratory tract or skin infections, particularly if there is concern about Streptococcus pneumoniae with decreased susceptibility to penicillin, or beta-lactamase-mediated resistance among the common community-acquired pathogens.

Background: Observational studies have suggested that lung volume reduction surgery (LVRS) is superior to optimal medical therapy for selected subsets of patients with advanced emphysema. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with the exception of the National Emphysema Treatment Trial (NETT), failed to enroll a sufficient number of patients to provide clinicians and patients with convincing outcome data on the usefulness of LVRS. It was postulated that a meta-analysis of these RCTs (3-12 months' follow up) may provide more compelling information on the value of LVRS in patients with emphysema.

Methods: A comprehensive search of the MEDLINE database between January 1994 and January 2004 for RCTs on LVRS was performed.

Results: From a total of eight RCTs on record, six studies (306 patients) with 3- to 12-month follow up were deemed suitable for meta-analysis. Key baseline features of these RCT populations included heterogeneous emphysema, comparable inclusion/exclusion criteria and, in retrospect, low walking capacity as measured by the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD). This profile closely resembles NETT's 'predominantly upper lobe--low exercise tolerance emphysema' cohort. The LVRS arm of the meta-analysis population showed better results than the medical cohort in terms of pulmonary function (FEV(1) p < 0.0001, FVC p < 0.0001, residual volume p < 0.0001, total lung capacity p = 0.004), gas exchange (arterial partial pressure of oxygen p < 0.0001) and exercise capacity (6MWD p = 0.0002). Although information on quality-of-life measures was not sufficiently uniform to qualify for meta-analysis, a survey of available data revealed better results in the surgical than in the medical arms of each RCT. Mortality 6-12 months after random assignment to treatment was similar in the two study arms, suggesting that the operative mortality from LVRS was offset, within months, by deaths in the medical arm.

Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that a selected subset of patients with advanced, heterogeneous emphysema and low exercise tolerance (6MWD) experienced better outcomes from LVRS than from medical therapy.

Intermediate-acting inhaled beta2-agonists (e.g. albuterol [salbutamol]), once recommended for round-the-clock bronchodilation, are now recommended to be used exclusively as-needed. Guidelines advise that asthma should be controlled with anti-inflammatory therapeutic strategies so that the as-needed requirement for inhaled beta2-agonists should be infrequent; ideally less than several times per week, up to once a day for exercise, and none at night. These recommendations are based upon the recognition that asthma is primarily an inflammatory condition and that the major thrust of therapy should be anti-inflammatory, including environmental control and administration of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), leukotriene-receptor antagonists, and possibly oral theophylline and inhaled cromones; the cromones include cromolyn sodium (sodium cromogylcate) and nedocromil. While this is the primary rationale behind the as-needed infrequent prescription of the inhaled beta2-agonist paradigm, there are a number of detrimental effects that can be seen with regularly scheduled (or frequent as-needed) use of inhaled beta2-agonists. These include tolerance to the bronchodilator and particularly the bronchoprotective effects, increased airway responsiveness to allergen, worsened asthma control, and, probably most importantly, over-reliance on an excellent symptom reliever leading to undertreatment. Any or all of these could be responsible for the demonstrated dose-response relationship between inhaled beta2-agonist overuse and death from asthma. Several controlled clinical trials, which have included many patients with at least moderately severe asthma, have failed to demonstrate any obvious advantage to the regular scheduled use of inhaled beta2-agonists compared with as-needed inhaled beta2-agonists. On the other hand, despite no obvious advantage, regular use of albuterol 1000-1200 microg/day appears to be well tolerated and reasonably safe. When asthma is treated using an as-needed, infrequent inhaled beta2-agonist, the requirements for beta2-agonists become a useful marker of whether or not the asthma is adequately controlled. When inhaled beta2-agonists are required inordinately frequently (i.e. when asthma is not adequately controlled), after ensuring compliance with ICS, the most common strategy is to add one of the long-acting inhaled beta2-agonists twice daily. On the basis of the available evidence, the as-needed intermediate-acting inhaled beta2-agonist therapeutic strategy appears appropriate for patients with moderate-to-severe asthma.

Background: Long-acting bronchodilators are recommended for the management of stable COPD to relieve symptoms and improve quality of life. The tulobuterol patch (Hokunalin) is a transdermal patch preparation of the beta2-adrenoceptor agonist (beta2-agonist) tulobuterol designed to yield sustained beta(2)-agonistic effects for 24 hours when applied once daily.

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of tulobuterol patch and inhaled salmeterol (Serevent Diskus) in the treatment of stable COPD.

Study design: Clinically stable COPD patients (age > or = 40 years, postbronchodilator FEV1/FVC <70%, and postbronchodilator FEV1 <80% predicted) were enrolled in a multicenter, open-label randomized study. After a 2-week run-in period, patients were administered either tulobuterol (2mg once-daily applied as a patch) or salmeterol (50 microg per inhalation, twice a day) for 12 weeks.

Results: Data for 92 patients (46 each for each treatment group) were analyzed. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics in the tulobuterol versus salmeterol groups: age, 69.2 +/- 7.4 vs 71.6 +/- 7.3 years; male, 91% versus 96%; and patients with stage II (III) COPD, 32.6% (67.4%) versus 50% (50%). FEV1, FVC, and PEF improved during treatment in both groups compared with baseline, with no significant between group differences. The total St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) score was significantly improved relative to baseline in the tulobuterol group at 8 weeks (-4.7 units [U]), but not in the salmeterol group at all timepoints. Domain analysis of the SGRQ scores revealed significant improvement in the symptom score relative to baseline in the tulobuterol group at weeks 4 (-6.9U), 8 (-12.0U), and 12 (-11.7U), but not in the salmeterol group in any of the domains tested. Medical Research Council dyspnea scale score improved during treatment in both groups, with no significant differences between groups. Compliance with the treatment regimen was significantly better in the tulobuterol than in the salmeterol group (98.5% vs 94.1%; p < 0.05).

Conclusion: These findings indicate that once-daily transdermal sustained-release tulobuterol is as effective or better than the inhaled long-acting beta2-agonist salmeterol in the management of stable COPD, with significant effects on quality of life.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a newly emerged infection that is caused by a previously unrecognized virus - a novel coronavirus designated as SARS-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV). From November 2002 to July 2003 the cumulative number of worldwide cases was >8000, with a mortality rate of close to 10%. The mortality has been higher in older patients and those with co-morbidities. SARS has been defined using clinical and epidemiological criteria and cases are considered laboratory-confirmed if SARS coronavirus is isolated, if antibody to SARS coronavirus is detected, or a polymerase chain reaction test by appropriate criteria is positive. At the time of writing (24 May 2004), no specific therapy has been recommended. A variety of treatments have been attempted, but there are no controlled data. Most patients have been treated throughout the illness with broad-spectrum antimicrobials, supplemental oxygen, intravenous fluids, and other supportive measures. Transmission of SARS is facilitated by close contact with patients with symptomatic infection. The majority of cases have been reported among healthcare providers and family members of SARS patients. Since SARS-CoV is contagious, measures for prevention center on avoidance of exposure, and infection control strategies for suspected cases and contacts. This includes standard precautions (hand hygiene), contact precautions (gowns, goggles, gloves) and airborne precautions (negative pressure rooms and high efficiency masks). In light of reports of new cases identified during the winter of 2003-4 in China, it seems possible that SARS will be an important cause of pneumonia in the future, and the screening of outpatients at risk for SARS may become part of the pneumonia evaluation.

The role of chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been debated over three decades, but it is only relatively recently that chemotherapy has become a standard of care for this disease. In addition to prolonging survival, chemotherapy can palliate distressing symptoms. Concerns that the adverse effects of chemotherapy are likely to outweigh its benefits have largely not been confirmed by quality-of-life data reported among patients with good performance status. Platinum-based chemotherapy regimens in which cisplatin or carboplatin are partnered by a third-generation cytotoxic drug such as gemcitabine, paclitaxel or vinorelbine, have similar activity and efficacy, but differ in adverse effect profiles. Response rates of 30-40% should be expected with median and 1-year survival of 8-10 months and 30-40%, respectively. In the second-line setting chemotherapy with docetaxel has been shown to be significantly superior to best supportive care alone. In a recent trial that compared docetaxel to the novel antifolate, pemetrexed the response rates and survival rates did not differ, but the toxicity profile favored pemetrexed. Overall, these data demonstrate that progress has been made in the use of chemotherapy to improve survival in patients with NSCLC without increasing the incidence of further toxicity. In the past, the potential to survive 1 year was extremely small, whereas now many more patients reach this milestone as well as the 2-year point. However, a plateau has probably been reached with existing cytotoxic drugs and there is a general belief that the next significant advance in the treatment of NSCLC will come from the addition of drugs that target specific molecular pathways in sequence with standard chemotherapy regimens.