Is it preferable to administer a bronchodilator once- or twice-daily when treating COPD?

Nocturnal and early morning symptoms are common and uncomfortable in many patients with COPD, and are likely to affect their long-term outcomes. However, it is still debated whether it is better to give long-acting bronchodilators once- or twice-daily to symptomatic COPD patients. The functional link between circadian rhythms of autonomic tone and airway calibre explains why the timing of administration of bronchodilators in chronic airway diseases can induce different effects when taken at different biological (circadian) times. However, the timing also depends on the pharmacological characteristics of the bronchodilator to be used. Because the profile of bronchodilation produced by once-daily vs. twice-daily long-acting bronchodilators differs throughout 24 h, selecting long-acting bronchodilators may be customized to specific patient preferences based on the need for further bronchodilation in the evening. This is especially helpful for people who experience respiratory symptoms at night or early morning. Compared to placebo, evening bronchodilator administration is consistently linked with persistent overnight improvements in dynamic respiratory mechanics and inspiratory neural drive. The current evidence indicates that nocturnal and early morning symptoms control is best handled by a LAMA taken in the evening. In contrast, it seems preferable to use a LABA for daytime symptoms. Therefore, it can be speculated that combining a LAMA with a LABA can improve bronchodilation and control symptoms better. Both LAMA and LABA must be rapid in their onset of action. Aclidinium/formoterol, a twice-daily combination, is the most studies of the available LAMA/LABA combinations in terms of impact on daytime and nocturnal symptoms.

Fluoroscopy-guided hydrostatic reduction of intussusception in infancy: role of pharmacological premedication.

PURPOSE: Intussusception is one of the most common causes of paediatric emergency. Fluoroscopy-guided hydrostatic reduction is a common nonoperative management strategy for the treatment of intussusception. The role of pharmacological premedication in increasing the success rate of hydrostatic reduction is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to verify the presence of a possible correlation between pharmacological premedication and the percentage of hydrostatic reduction of intussusception in paediatric patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study considered children with a diagnosis of idiopathic intussusception treated at our hospital between January 2007 and June 2013. One group of patients underwent hydrostatic reduction by barium enema without any preliminary therapy. A second group of patients received pharmacological premedication with both a sedative and an anti-oedematous agent before the procedure. RESULTS: A total of 398 patients were treated with barium enema for therapeutic purposes. In the group of patients who received no premedication (n = 254), 165 (65 %) children achieved hydrostatic reduction of the intussusception. Among the patients who received pharmacological premedication prior to barium enema (n = 144), 122 (85 %) children achieved resolution of the intussusception. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the use of pharmacological premedication is effective for the reduction of the intussusception, as its limit patient stress, fluoroscopic time and radiation dose.