Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Two different dosages of nebulized steroid versus parenteral steroid in the management of COPD exacerbations: a randomized control trial.
Yilmazel Ucar, Elif; Araz, Omer; Meral, Mehmet; Sonkaya, Esin; Saglam, Leyla; Kaynar, Hasan; Gorguner, Ali Metin; Akgun, Metin.
Afiliação
  • Yilmazel Ucar E; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
  • Araz O; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
  • Meral M; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
  • Sonkaya E; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
  • Saglam L; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
  • Kaynar H; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
  • Gorguner AM; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
  • Akgun M; Department of Pulmonary Diseases, Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
Med Sci Monit ; 20: 513-20, 2014 Mar 28.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24675102
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of nebulized steroid (NS) with systemic corticosteroids (SC) and to determine optimal NS dose in the treatment of patients with COPD exacerbations requiring hospitalization. MATERIAL AND

METHODS:

The study was a randomized, parallel design trial. Eligible patients (n=86) were randomly allocated to 1 of the 3 treatment groups parenteral corticosteroid (PS) (n=33), 4 mg (NB) (n=27), or 8 mg NB (n=26). Partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2), carbon dioxide (PaCO2), pH, and oxygen saturation (SaO2) were evaluated at baseline, 24 h, 48 h, and discharge. Airway obstruction (forced vital capacity [FVC] and forced expiratory volume 1 s [FEV1]) was evaluated at admission and discharge.

RESULTS:

There were no significant differences between the groups for all parameters at all time periods, except for higher FEV1 value in the 8-mg NB group at baseline. In groups, significant differences were determined for FVC, FEV1, PaO2, and SaO2 (p<0.001), but not for PaCO2 and pH, in comparison to their baseline values. As adverse events, hyperglycemia and oral moniliasis were observed in the PS group (n=4) and in the NB groups (n=5), respectively, and treatment change was required in 9 patients (2 patients in the PS group and 7 patients in the NB groups) (p=0.57).

CONCLUSIONS:

Nebulized budesonide may be used as an alternative to SC because of its equal effectiveness and lesser systemic adverse effects. The choice of optimal dosage needs to be evaluated carefully because adverse effect and dropout rates varied according to dosage. However, there is a need for further studies including more severe cases and evaluating long-term outcomes or relapses comparing the 3 arms.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Esteroides / Nebulizadores e Vaporizadores / Progressão da Doença / Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Esteroides / Nebulizadores e Vaporizadores / Progressão da Doença / Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2014 Tipo de documento: Article