Addition of intravenous aminophylline to beta2-agonists in adults with acute asthma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Aminophylline has been used extensively in acute asthma, but its role is unclear especially with respect to any additional benefit when added to beta2-agonists. OBJECTIVES: To determine the magnitude of effect of the addition of intravenous aminophylline to beta2-agonists in adult patients with acute asthma treated in the emergency setting. SEARCH STRATEGY: Studies were identified from the following sources: The Cochrane Airways Group register (derived from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL standardised searches), hand searched respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. Potentially relevant articles were obtained, and their bibliographic lists were hand searched for additional articles. The search included searches of the database up to 1999. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing intravenous aminophylline versus placebo in adults with acute asthma and treated with beta-adrenergic agonists. Patients could be treated with or without corticosteroids or other bronchodilators. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A total of 210 abstracts were identified. Two independent reviewers selected a total of 27 eligible studies for possible inclusion, in which quality assessment was performed and a third reviewer was used to adjudicate disagreements. Peak expiratory flow (PEFR) and forced expiratory volume in the first second (FEV1) data were extracted and entered in Review Manager from these studies. Information not obtained from the authors was estimated from graphs. All data were entered and double checked by two reviewers. Results are reported as weighted mean differences (WMD) or odds ratio (OR), both with 95% confidential intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Fifteen trials were included. Overall, the quality of the studies was only moderate; concealment of allocation was assessed as clearly adequate in only seven (45%) of the trials. The doses of aminophylline and other medications and the severity of asthma varied between studies. There was no statistically significant effect of aminophylline on airflow outcomes at any time period. The aminophylline treated group had higher values of PEFR at 12 (PEFR 8 L/min or 2.3%) and 24 hours (PEFR 22 L/min or 6.4%), but these were not significant (p>0.05). Two subgroup analyses were performed by grouping studies according to mean baseline airflow limitation (n = 11 studies) and the use of any steroids (n = 9 studies). There was no relationship between baseline airflow limitation nor the use of steroids on the effect of aminophylline. Aminophylline treated patients reported more palpitations/arrhythmias (OR: 2.9; 95% CI: 1.5 to 5.7) and vomiting (OR: 4.2; 95% CI 2.4 to 7.4), but no difference was found in tremor or hospital admissions. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: In acute asthma, the use of intravenous aminophylline did not result in any additional bronchodilation compared to standard care with beta-agonists. The frequency of adverse effects was higher with aminophylline. No subgroups in which aminophylline might be more effective could be identified. These results should be added to consensus statements and guidelines.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,023 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,006 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».