Complexity in clinical diagnoses of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is a clinical syndrome with various causes. It is not uncommon that COPD patients presenting with dyspnea have multiple causes for their symptoms including AECOPD, pneumonia, or congestive heart failure occurring concurrently. METHODS: To identify clinical, radiographic, and laboratory characteristics that might help distinguish AECOPD from another dominant disease in patients with a history of COPD, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with admitting diagnosis of AECOPD who were screened for a prospective randomized controlled trial from Sep 2016 to Mar 2018. Clinical characteristics, course in hospital, and final diagnosis at discharge were reviewed and adjudicated by two authors. The final diagnosis of each patient was determined based on the synthesis of all presenting signs and symptoms, imaging, and laboratory results. We adhered to AECOPD diagnosis definitions based on the GOLD guidelines. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify any associated features of AECOPD with and without other acute processes contributing to dyspnea. RESULTS: Three hundred fifteen hospitalized patients with admitting diagnosis of AECOPD were included. Mean age was 72.5 (SD 10.6) years. Two thirds (65.4%) had spirometry defined COPD. The most common presenting symptom was dyspnea (96.5%), followed by cough (67.9%), and increased sputum (57.5%). One hundred and eighty (57.1%) had a final diagnosis of AECOPD alone whereas 87 (27.6%) had AECOPD with other conditions and 48 (15.2%) did not have AECOPD after adjudication. Increased sputum purulence (OR 3.35, 95%CI 1.68-6.69) and elevated venous pCO2 (OR 1.04, 95%CI 1.01 - 1.07) were associated with a diagnosis of AECOPD but these were not associated with AECOPD alone without concomitant conditions. Radiographic evidence of pleural effusion (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.12 - 0.58) was negatively associated with AECOPD with or without other conditions while radiographic evidence of pulmonary edema (OR 0.31; 95%CI 0.11 - 0.91) and lobar pneumonia (OR 0.13, 95%CI 0.07 - 0.25) suggested against the diagnosis of AECOPD alone. CONCLUSION: The study highlighted the complexity and difficulty of AECOPD diagnosis. A more specific clinical tool to diagnose AECOPD is needed.

The relationship between opioid use and obstructive sleep apnea: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

We conducted a systematic review to address limited evidence suggesting that opioids may induce or aggravate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). All clinical trials or observational studies on adults from 1946 to 2018 found through MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Databases were eligible. We assessed the quality of the studies using published guidelines. Fifteen studies (six clinical trials and nine observational) with only two of good quality were included. Fourteen studies investigated the impact of opioids on the presence or severity of OSA, four addressed the effects of treatment for OSA  in opioid users, and none explored the consequences of opioid use in individuals with OSA. Eight of 14 studies found no significant relationship between opioid use or dose and apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) or degree of nocturnal desaturation. A random-effects meta-analysis (n = 10) determined the pooled mean change in AHI associated with opioid use of 1.47/h (-2.63-5.57; I2 = 65%). Three of the four studies found that continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy reduced AHI by 17-30/h in opioid users with OSA. Bilevel therapy with a back-up rate and adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) without mandatory pressure support successfully normalized AHI (≤5) in opioid users. Limited by a paucity of good-quality studies, our review did not show a significant relationship between opioid use and the severity of OSA. There was some evidence that CPAP, Bilevel therapy, and ASV alleviate OSA for opioid users, with higher failure rates observed in patients on CPAP in opioid users.

Pharmacological interventions to improve sleep in hospitalised adults: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Patients often suffer from disturbed sleep in hospital. Poor-quality sleep in hospitalised patients has been associated with significant morbidity and pharmacological sleep aids are often prescribed. The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions used for sleep in hospitalised patients. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane database and grey literature for prospective studies that evaluated sleep in hospitalised adults after a pharmacological intervention. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Two reviewers assessed studies for inclusion and extracted data for efficacy outcomes, including sleep efficiency, sleep latency, sleep fragmentation and objectively measured sleep stage distribution. Risk of bias was assessed and meta-analyses were planned contingent upon homogeneity of the included studies. RESULTS: After screening 1920 citations, 15 studies involving 861 patients were included. Medications studied included benzodiazepines, nonbenzodiazepine sedatives, melatonin, propofol and dexmedetomidine. Five studies were deemed to be of high quality. Heterogeneity and variable outcome reporting precluded meta-analysis in most cases. No consistent trends with respect to sleep efficiency, quality or interruptions were observed identifying a drug or drug class as superior to another or no treatment. Benzodiazepines appeared to be better than no treatment with respect to sleep latency, but this was not consistently demonstrated across all studies. Sleep stage distribution shows that sleep in hospital is dominated by stages N1 and N2. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to suggest that pharmacotherapy improves the quality or quantity of sleep in hospitalised patients suffering from poor sleep. No drug class or specific drug was identified as superior even when compared to placebo or no treatment. Although 15 studies were included, the quality of evidence was limited by their quality and size. Larger, better-designed trials in hospitalised adults are needed.

Effect of physical training on airway inflammation in bronchial asthma: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The majority of the global population cannot afford existing asthma pharmacotherapy. Physical training as an airway anti-inflammatory therapy for asthma could potentially be a non-invasive, easily available, affordable, and healthy treatment modality. However, effects of physical training on airway inflammation in asthma are currently inconclusive. The main objective of this review is to summarize the effects of physical training on airway inflammation in asthmatics. METHODS: A peer reviewed search was applied to Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and DARE databases. We included all observational epidemiological research studies and RCTs. Studies evaluating at least one marker of airway inflammation in asthmatics after a period of physical training were selected. Data extraction was performed in a blinded fashion. We decided a priori to avoid pooling of the data in anticipation of heterogeneity of the studies, specifically heterogeneity of airway inflammatory markers studied as outcome measures. RESULTS: From the initial 2635 studies; 23 studies (16 RCTs and 7 prospective cohort studies) were included. Study sizes were generally small (median sample size = 30). There was a reduction in C-reactive protein, malondialdehyde, nitric oxide, sputum cell counts and IgE in asthmatics with physical training. Mixed results were observed after training for fractional excretion of nitric oxide and bronchial hyperresponsiveness. The data was not pooled owing to significant heterogeneity between studies, and a funnel plot tests for publication bias were not performed because there were less than 10 studies for almost all outcome measures. Physical training intervention type, duration, intensity, frequency, primary outcome measures, methods of assessing outcome measures, and study designs were heterogeneous. CONCLUSION: Due to reporting issues, lack of information and heterogeneity there was no definite conclusion; however, some findings suggest physical training may reduce airway inflammation in asthmatics.

Tunneled pleural catheters in the management of chylothorax from central venous catheter-related superior vena cava obstruction.

Chylothorax is characterized by the accumulation of chyle in the pleural space, of which the most common cause is trauma or neoplasm. Although chylothorax accounts for a small proportion of clinical pleural effusions, prompt recognition is needed to avoid malnutrition, immunodeficiency, and fibrothorax. We report 2 patients with superior vena cava obstruction caused by tunneled venous catheters resulting in chylothorax and demonstrate the potential safety of tunneled pleural catheters for prolonged chylothorax drainage in an outpatient setting with rigorous follow-up. Changes in pleural fluid chemistries of the effusions and the possible pathophysiology were assessed with a review of the literature on pleural fluid chemistries in superior vena cava obstruction.

Effect of physical training on airway inflammation in animal models of asthma: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: There is little data on the effect of exercise on markers of airway inflammation in human asthmatics. The main objective of this review is to determine the effects of physical training on markers of airway inflammation in animal models of asthma. METHODS: A peer reviewed search was applied to Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane, and DARE databases. Data extraction was performed in a blinded fashion. RESULTS: From the initial 2336 studies, a total of 10 studies were selected for the final analysis. All were randomized controlled trials with low to moderate intensity training on ovalbumin-sensitized mice. In the exercised group of mice, there was a reduction in BAL eosinophils and Th-2 cytokines, no change in Th-1 cytokines, an increase in IL-10, and a reversal of airway remodeling. The data was not pooled owing to significant heterogeneity between studies, and a funnel plot test for publication bias was not performed because there were few studies reporting on any one outcome measure. The asthma models differed between studies in age and gender of mice, as well as in timing of physical training after sensitization. The risk of bias was unclear for some studies though this may not influence outcome measures. The accuracy of data extracted from graphics is unknown. CONCLUSIONS: Physical training improves airway inflammation in animal asthma models.