支气管扩张剂反应性测试中雾化与计量吸入器和喷雾器的对比:一项回顾性研究

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2023-12-10 DOI:10.1177/17534666231214134
Rongli Lu, Ying Li, Chengping Hu, Pinhua Pan, Qiaohong Zhao, Ruoxi He
{"title":"支气管扩张剂反应性测试中雾化与计量吸入器和喷雾器的对比:一项回顾性研究","authors":"Rongli Lu, Ying Li, Chengping Hu, Pinhua Pan, Qiaohong Zhao, Ruoxi He","doi":"10.1177/17534666231214134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The recommended delivery mode for bronchodilators in bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) testing remains controversial. Objective: To compare the efficacy of salbutamol administration using a nebulizer versus a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with spacer in BDR testing. Design: A retrospective study. Methods: This study examined the data of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who completed BDR testing between 1 December 2021 and 30 June 2022, at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University. After administering 400 μg of salbutamol through an MDI with spacer or 2.5 mg using a nebulizer, the changes in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were analyzed in patients with moderate-to-very severe spirometric abnormalities [pre-bronchodilator FEV1 percentage predicted values (FEV1%pred) ⩽59%]. Significant responsiveness was assessed as >12% and >200 mL improvement in FEV1 and/or FVC or >10% increase in FEV1%pred or FVC percentage predicted values (FVC%pred) from pre- to post-bronchodilator administration. Results: Of the enrolled 894 patients, 83.2% were male (median age, 63 years). After propensity score matching, 240 pairs of patients were selected. The increment in FEV1 and increased FEV1 relative to the predicted value (ΔFEV1%pred) were significantly higher in patients <65 years and those with severe spirometric abnormalities in the nebulization group than patients in the MDI group (all p < 0.05). Compared with MDI with spacer, patients who used nebulization had a 30 mL greater increase in ΔFEV1 (95% CI: 0.01–0.05, p = 0.004) and a 1.09% greater increase in ΔFEV1%pred (95% CI: 0.303–1.896, p = 0.007) from baseline. According to the > 12% and >200 mL increase criterion, the significant BDR rate with nebulization was 1.67 times higher than that with an MDI with spacer (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.13–2.47, p = 0.009). Conclusion: Salbutamol delivered using a nebulizer may be preferable to an MDI with spacer in certain circumstances. Nebulization has the potential to increase responsiveness to salbutamol in BDR testing.","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nebulization versus metered-dose inhaler and spacer in bronchodilator responsiveness testing: a retrospective study\",\"authors\":\"Rongli Lu, Ying Li, Chengping Hu, Pinhua Pan, Qiaohong Zhao, Ruoxi He\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17534666231214134\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: The recommended delivery mode for bronchodilators in bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) testing remains controversial. Objective: To compare the efficacy of salbutamol administration using a nebulizer versus a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with spacer in BDR testing. Design: A retrospective study. Methods: This study examined the data of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who completed BDR testing between 1 December 2021 and 30 June 2022, at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University. After administering 400 μg of salbutamol through an MDI with spacer or 2.5 mg using a nebulizer, the changes in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were analyzed in patients with moderate-to-very severe spirometric abnormalities [pre-bronchodilator FEV1 percentage predicted values (FEV1%pred) ⩽59%]. Significant responsiveness was assessed as >12% and >200 mL improvement in FEV1 and/or FVC or >10% increase in FEV1%pred or FVC percentage predicted values (FVC%pred) from pre- to post-bronchodilator administration. Results: Of the enrolled 894 patients, 83.2% were male (median age, 63 years). After propensity score matching, 240 pairs of patients were selected. The increment in FEV1 and increased FEV1 relative to the predicted value (ΔFEV1%pred) were significantly higher in patients <65 years and those with severe spirometric abnormalities in the nebulization group than patients in the MDI group (all p < 0.05). Compared with MDI with spacer, patients who used nebulization had a 30 mL greater increase in ΔFEV1 (95% CI: 0.01–0.05, p = 0.004) and a 1.09% greater increase in ΔFEV1%pred (95% CI: 0.303–1.896, p = 0.007) from baseline. According to the > 12% and >200 mL increase criterion, the significant BDR rate with nebulization was 1.67 times higher than that with an MDI with spacer (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.13–2.47, p = 0.009). Conclusion: Salbutamol delivered using a nebulizer may be preferable to an MDI with spacer in certain circumstances. Nebulization has the potential to increase responsiveness to salbutamol in BDR testing.\",\"PeriodicalId\":3,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Electronic Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17534666231214134\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17534666231214134","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在支气管扩张剂反应性(BDR)测试中,支气管扩张剂的推荐给药方式仍然存在争议。目的:比较沙丁胺醇雾化给药与带间隔剂的计量吸入器(MDI)在BDR检测中的疗效。设计:回顾性研究。方法:本研究检查了2021年12月1日至2022年6月30日在中南大学湘雅医院完成BDR检测的慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者的数据。分析中度至极重度肺功能异常患者经间隔剂吸入沙丁胺醇400 μg或雾化吸入2.5 mg后的用力呼气量(FEV1)和用力肺活量(FVC)变化[支气管扩张剂前FEV1百分比预测值(FEV1%pred)≥59%]。显着反应性评估为FEV1和/或FVC改善>12%和> 200ml,或FEV1%pred或FVC百分比预测值(FVC%pred)从支气管扩张剂使用前到使用后增加>10%。结果:入组的894例患者中,83.2%为男性(中位年龄63岁)。经倾向评分匹配后,选取240对患者。FEV1的增量和FEV1的增加相对于预测值(ΔFEV1%pred)在12%和>200 mL的增加标准中均显著高于雾化治疗组,显著BDR率是有间隔的MDI组的1.67倍(OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.13 ~ 2.47, p = 0.009)。结论:在某些情况下,沙丁胺醇雾化器给药优于带间隔剂的MDI。在BDR试验中,雾化有可能增加对沙丁胺醇的反应性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Nebulization versus metered-dose inhaler and spacer in bronchodilator responsiveness testing: a retrospective study
Background: The recommended delivery mode for bronchodilators in bronchodilator responsiveness (BDR) testing remains controversial. Objective: To compare the efficacy of salbutamol administration using a nebulizer versus a metered-dose inhaler (MDI) with spacer in BDR testing. Design: A retrospective study. Methods: This study examined the data of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who completed BDR testing between 1 December 2021 and 30 June 2022, at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University. After administering 400 μg of salbutamol through an MDI with spacer or 2.5 mg using a nebulizer, the changes in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) were analyzed in patients with moderate-to-very severe spirometric abnormalities [pre-bronchodilator FEV1 percentage predicted values (FEV1%pred) ⩽59%]. Significant responsiveness was assessed as >12% and >200 mL improvement in FEV1 and/or FVC or >10% increase in FEV1%pred or FVC percentage predicted values (FVC%pred) from pre- to post-bronchodilator administration. Results: Of the enrolled 894 patients, 83.2% were male (median age, 63 years). After propensity score matching, 240 pairs of patients were selected. The increment in FEV1 and increased FEV1 relative to the predicted value (ΔFEV1%pred) were significantly higher in patients <65 years and those with severe spirometric abnormalities in the nebulization group than patients in the MDI group (all p < 0.05). Compared with MDI with spacer, patients who used nebulization had a 30 mL greater increase in ΔFEV1 (95% CI: 0.01–0.05, p = 0.004) and a 1.09% greater increase in ΔFEV1%pred (95% CI: 0.303–1.896, p = 0.007) from baseline. According to the > 12% and >200 mL increase criterion, the significant BDR rate with nebulization was 1.67 times higher than that with an MDI with spacer (OR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.13–2.47, p = 0.009). Conclusion: Salbutamol delivered using a nebulizer may be preferable to an MDI with spacer in certain circumstances. Nebulization has the potential to increase responsiveness to salbutamol in BDR testing.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
期刊最新文献
Hyperbaric oxygen treatment promotes tendon-bone interface healing in a rabbit model of rotator cuff tears. Oxygen-ozone therapy for myocardial ischemic stroke and cardiovascular disorders. Comparative study on the anti-inflammatory and protective effects of different oxygen therapy regimens on lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury in mice. Heme oxygenase/carbon monoxide system and development of the heart. Hyperbaric oxygen for moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury: outcomes 5-8 years after injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1