Inhaled magnesium sulfate in the treatment of acute asthma.

BACKGROUND: Asthma exacerbations can be frequent and range in severity from mild to life-threatening. The use of magnesium sulfate (MgSO4) is one of numerous treatment options available during acute exacerbations. While the efficacy of intravenous MgSO4 has been demonstrated, the role of inhaled MgSO4 is less clear. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of inhaled MgSO4 administered in acute asthma. SPECIFIC AIMS: to quantify the effects of inhaled MgSO4 I) in addition to combination treatment with inhaled ß2-agonist and ipratropium bromide; ii) in addition to inhaled ß2-agonist; and iii) in comparison to inhaled ß2-agonist. SEARCH METHODS: We identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials and online trials registries in September 2017. We supplemented these with searches of the reference lists of published studies and by contact with trialists. SELECTION CRITERIA: RCTs including adults or children with acute asthma were eligible for inclusion in the review. We included studies if patients were treated with nebulised MgSO4 alone or in combination with ß2-agonist or ipratropium bromide or both, and were compared with the same co-intervention alone or inactive control. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial selection, data extraction and risk of bias. We made efforts to collect missing data from authors. We present results, with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), as mean differences (MDs) or standardised mean differences (SMDs) for pulmonary function, clinical severity scores and vital signs; and risk ratios (RRs) for hospital admission. We used risk differences (RDs) to analyse adverse events because events were rare. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-five trials (43 references) of varying methodological quality were eligible; they included 2907 randomised patients (2777 patients completed). Nine of the 25 included studies involved adults; four included adult and paediatric patients; eight studies enrolled paediatric patients; and in the remaining four studies the age of participants was not stated. The design, definitions, intervention and outcomes were different in all 25 studies; this heterogeneity made direct comparisons difficult. The quality of the evidence presented ranged from high to very low, with most outcomes graded as low or very low. This was largely due to concerns about the methodological quality of the included studies and imprecision in the pooled effect estimates. Inhaled magnesium sulfate in addition to inhaled ß2-agonist and ipratropiumWe included seven studies in this comparison. Although some individual studies reported improvement in lung function indices favouring the intervention group, results were inconsistent overall and the largest study reporting this outcome found no between-group difference at 60 minutes (MD -0.3 % predicted peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), 95% CI -2.71% to 2.11%). Admissions to hospital at initial presentation may be reduced by the addition of inhaled magnesium sulfate (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.00; participants = 1308; studies = 4; I² = 52%) but no difference was detected for re-admissions or escalation of care to ITU/HDU. Serious adverse events during admission were rare. There was no difference between groups for all adverse events during admission (RD 0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.05; participants = 1197; studies = 2). Inhaled magnesium sulfate in addition to inhaled ß2-agonistWe included 13 studies in this comparison. Although some individual studies reported improvement in lung function indices favouring the intervention group, none of the pooled results showed a conclusive benefit as measured by FEV1 or PEFR. Pooled results for hospital admission showed a point estimate that favoured the combination of MgSO4 and ß2-agonist, but the confidence interval includes the possibility of admissions increasing in the intervention group (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.15; participants = 375; studies = 6; I² = 0%). There were no serious adverse events reported by any of the included studies and no between-group difference for all adverse events (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.03; participants = 694; studies = 5). Inhaled magnesium sulfate versus inhaled ß2-agonistWe included four studies in this comparison. The evidence for the efficacy of ß2-agonists in acute asthma is well-established and therefore this could be considered a historical comparison. Two studies reported a benefit of ß2-agonist over MgSO4 alone for PEFR and two studies reported no difference; we did not pool these results. Admissions to hospital were only reported by one small study and events were rare, leading to an uncertain result. No serious adverse events were reported in any of the studies in this comparison; one small study reported mild to moderate adverse events but the result is imprecise. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with nebulised MgSO4 may result in modest additional benefits for lung function and hospital admission when added to inhaled ß2-agonists and ipratropium bromide, but our confidence in the evidence is low and there remains substantial uncertainty. The recent large, well-designed trials have generally not demonstrated clinically important benefits. Nebulised MgSO4 does not appear to be associated with an increase in serious adverse events. Individual studies suggest that those with more severe attacks and attacks of shorter duration may experience a greater benefit but further research into subgroups is warranted.Despite including 24 trials in this review update we were unable to pool data for all outcomes of interest and this has limited the strength of the conclusions reached. A core outcomes set for studies in acute asthma is needed. This is particularly important in paediatric studies where measuring lung function at the time of an exacerbation may not be possible. Placebo-controlled trials in patients not responding to standard maximal treatment, including inhaled ß2-agonists and ipratropium bromide and systemic steroids, may help establish if nebulised MgSO4 has a role in acute asthma. However, the accumulating evidence suggests that a substantial benefit may be unlikely.

Choosing wisely: The impact of patient selection on efficacy and safety outcomes in the EINSTEIN-DVT/PE and AMPLIFY trials.

BACKGROUND: The results of the EINSTEIN-DVT/PE and AMPLIFY trials, which compared rivaroxaban and apixaban with conventional anticoagulation therapy for acute venous thromboembolism (VTE), respectively, are often compared. However, the trials differed in duration of therapy (3-12 and 6months, respectively) and in patient selection (few exclusion criteria and more stringent exclusion criteria, respectively). METHODS: To determine the effect of these methodological differences on outcomes, the patients enrolled in EINSTEIN-DVT/PE were divided into 2 cohorts; the 5253 patients that matched the exclusion criteria for AMPLIFY and were treated for at least 6months (cohort 1) and the 2368 patients who would have been ineligible for AMPLIFY (cohort 2). RESULTS: Compared with patients in cohort 2, those in cohort 1 were older and more often male and there were more with unprovoked VTE, prior VTE, cancer and known thrombophilia. In cohort 1, rivaroxaban would have significantly reduced recurrent VTE (relative risk [RR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43-0.95) and major bleeding (RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.30-0.82) compared with conventional therapy, whereas the two treatments would have had similar effects on recurrent VTE (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.65-1.79) and major bleeding (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.48-2.18) in cohort 2. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis illustrates the influence of patient selection and treatments duration on outcome results and highlights the limitations of cross-trial comparisons.

Inhaled magnesium sulfate in the treatment of acute asthma.

BACKGROUND: Asthma exacerbations can be frequent and range in severity from relatively mild to status asthmaticus. The use of magnesium sulfate (MgSO(4)) is one of numerous treatment options available during acute exacerbations. While the efficacy of intravenous MgSO(4) has been demonstrated, little is known of the role of inhaled MgSO(4). OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of inhaled MgSO(4) administered in acute asthma on pulmonary functions and admission rates. SPECIFIC AIMS: To quantify the effects of inhaled MgSO(4) i) in addition to inhaled ß(2)-agonist, ii) in comparison to inhaled ß(2)-agonist alone or iii) in addition to combination treatment with inhaled ß(2) -agonist and ipratropium bromide. SEARCH METHODS: Randomised controlled trials were identified from the Cochrane Airways Group register of trials in September 2012. These trials were supplemented with trials found in the reference list of published studies, studies found using extensive electronic search techniques, as well as a review of the grey literature and conference proceedings. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised (or pseudo-randomised) controlled trials including adults or children with acute asthma were eligible for inclusion in the review. Studies were included if patients were treated with nebulised MgSO(4) alone or in combination with ß(2)-agonist and/or ipratropium bromide and were compared with ß(2)-agonist alone or inactive control. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial selection, data extraction and risk of bias were assessed independently by two review authors. Efforts were made to collect missing data from authors. Results are presented as standardised mean differences (SMD) for pulmonary function and risk ratios (RR) for hospital admission; both are displayed with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN RESULTS: Sixteen trials (21 references) of unclear and high risk of bias were eligible and included 896 patients who were randomised (838 patients completed). Seven of the 16 included studies involved adults exclusively, three included adults and paediatric patients, four studies enrolled paediatric patients and in the remaining two studies the age of participants was not stated.The design, definitions, intervention and outcomes were different in all 16 studies; this heterogeneity made direct comparisons difficult (see additional tables 1-3).The overall risk of bias among the included studies was variable and this is reflected in the 'Summary of findings' table with most outcomes being judged as only moderate or less.Inhaled magnesium sulfate in addition to inhaled ß(2)-agonistThere was no statistically significant improvement in pulmonary function when inhaled MgSO(4) and ß(2)-agonist was compared with ß(2)-agonist alone (SMD 0.23; 95% CI -0.27 to 0.74; three studies, n = 188); however, there was considerable between study heterogeneity. There was no clear advantage in terms of hospital admissions (RR 0.76 95% CI 0.49, 1.16; four studies, n = 249), and there were no serious adverse events reported.Inhaled magnesium sulfate versus inhaled ß(2)-agonistThe results of pulmonary function in three studies that compared inhaled MgSO(4) versus ß(2)-agonist were too heterogeneous to combine; however, two of the studies found poorer lung function on MgSO(4). There was no significant difference in terms of hospital admissions in a single small study when MgSO(4) was compared to ß(2)-agonist (RR 0.53 95% CI 0.05, 5.31; one study, n = 33), and there were no serious adverse events reported.Inhaled magnesium sulfate in addition to inhaled ß(2)-agonist and ipratropiumA further comparison has been included in the 2012 update of this review of MgSO(4) given in addition to inhaled ipratropium and ß(2)-agonist therapy (as recommended by the GINA guidelines). However, there is not yet enough data for this outcome to come to any definite conclusions, but both small studies in adults with severe asthma exacerbation found improvements in pulmonary function with additional inhaled MgSO(4). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no good evidence that inhaled MgSO(4) can be used as a substitute for inhaled ß(2)-agonists. When used in addition to inhaled ß(2)-agonists (with or without inhaled ipratropium), there is currently no overall clear evidence of improved pulmonary function or reduced hospital admissions. However, individual study results from three trials suggest possible improved pulmonary function in those with severe asthma exacerbations (FEV1 less than 50% predicted). Heterogeneity among trials included in this review precludes a more definitive conclusion. Further studies should focus on inhaled MgSO(4) in addition to the current guideline treatment for acute asthma (inhaled ß(2) -agonist and ipratropium bromide). As the evidence suggests that the most effective role of nebulised MgSO(4) may be in those with severe acute features and this is where future research should be focused. A set of core outcomes needs to be agreed upon both in adult and paediatric studies to allow improved study comparison in future. 

Engaging men in the health system: observations from service providers.

Men's health is a significant public health issue in Australia. Increasingly, health indices show poor health outcomes for them. Literature suggests limitations in the health services dealing with their needs. If we are to improve boys' and men's health, we should look at the efficacy of these services and address their limitations. This study provides data from a survey about the types of services available for boys and men. The service provider respondents expressed major concerns and identified ways of improving services.

Use of isotonic nebulised magnesium sulphate as an adjuvant to salbutamol in treatment of severe asthma in adults: randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous magnesium can cause bronchodilation in treatment of severe asthma, however its effect by the nebulised route is uncertain. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of isotonic magnesium sulphate as an adjuvant to nebulised salbutamol in severe attacks of asthma. METHODS: We enrolled 52 patients with severe exacerbations of asthma presenting to the emergency departments at two hospitals in New Zealand. A severe exacerbation was defined as a forced expiratory volume at 1 s (FEV(1)) of less than 50% predicted 30 min after initial administration of 2.5 mg salbutamol via nebulisation. In this randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial patients received 2.5 mg nebulised salbutamol mixed with either 2.5 mL isotonic magnesium sulphate or isotonic saline on three occasions at 30 min intervals. The primary outcome measure was FEV(1) at 90 min. Analysis was per protocol. FINDINGS: At 90 min the mean FEV1 in the magnesium group was 1.96 L (95% CI 1.68-2.24) and in the saline group 1.55 L (1.24-1.87). The difference in the mean FEV(1) between the magnesium and saline groups was 0.37 L (0.13-0.61, p=0.003). INTERPRETATION: Use of isotonic magnesium as an adjuvant to nebulised salbutamol results in an enhanced bronchodilator response in treatment of severe asthma.