Fernandes Ricardo M, Bialy Liza M, Vandermeer Ben, Tjosvold Lisa, Plint Amy C, Patel Hema, Johnson David W, Klassen Terry P, Hartling Lisa
Laboratory of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Instituto de Medicina Molecular,Lisboa, Portugal.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Jun 4;2013(6):CD004878. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004878.pub4.
Previous systematic reviews have not shown clear benefit of glucocorticoids for acute viral bronchiolitis, but their use remains considerable. Recent large trials add substantially to current evidence and suggest novel glucocorticoid-including treatment approaches.
To review the efficacy and safety of systemic and inhaled glucocorticoids in children with acute viral bronchiolitis.
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE (1950 to January week 2, 2013), EMBASE (1980 to January 2013), LILACS (1982 to January 2013), Scopus® (1823 to January 2013) and IRAN MedEx (1998 to November 2009).
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing short-term systemic or inhaled glucocorticoids versus placebo or another intervention in children under 24 months with acute bronchiolitis (first episode with wheezing). Our primary outcomes were: admissions by days 1 and 7 for outpatient studies; and length of stay (LOS) for inpatient studies. Secondary outcomes included clinical severity parameters, healthcare use, pulmonary function, symptoms, quality of life and harms.
Two authors independently extracted data on study and participant characteristics, interventions and outcomes. We assessed risk of bias and graded strength of evidence. We meta-analysed inpatient and outpatient results separately using random-effects models. We pre-specified subgroup analyses, including the combined use of bronchodilators used in a protocol.
We included 17 trials (2596 participants); three had low overall risk of bias. Baseline severity, glucocorticoid schemes, comparators and outcomes were heterogeneous. Glucocorticoids did not significantly reduce outpatient admissions by days 1 and 7 when compared to placebo (pooled risk ratios (RRs) 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 1.08 and 0.86; 95% CI 0.7 to 1.06, respectively). There was no benefit in LOS for inpatients (mean difference -0.18 days; 95% CI -0.39 to 0.04). Unadjusted results from a large factorial low risk of bias RCT found combined high-dose systemic dexamethasone and inhaled epinephrine reduced admissions by day 7 (baseline risk of admission 26%; RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.95; number needed to treat 11; 95% CI 7 to 76), with no differences in short-term adverse effects. No other comparisons showed relevant differences in primary outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence does not support a clinically relevant effect of systemic or inhaled glucocorticoids on admissions or length of hospitalisation. Combined dexamethasone and epinephrine may reduce outpatient admissions, but results are exploratory and safety data limited. Future research should further assess the efficacy, harms and applicability of combined therapy.
以往的系统评价未显示糖皮质激素对急性病毒性细支气管炎有明显益处,但其使用仍较为普遍。近期的大型试验极大地丰富了现有证据,并提示了包括糖皮质激素在内的新型治疗方法。
评价全身应用及吸入糖皮质激素治疗急性病毒性细支气管炎患儿的疗效和安全性。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL 2012年第12期)、MEDLINE(1950年至2013年1月第2周)、EMBASE(1980年至2013年1月)、LILACS(1982年至2013年1月)、Scopus®(1823年至2013年1月)和IRAN MedEx(1998年至2009年11月)。
随机对照试验(RCT),比较短期全身应用或吸入糖皮质激素与安慰剂或其他干预措施,用于治疗24个月以下患有急性细支气管炎(首次发作伴喘息)的儿童。我们的主要结局为:门诊研究中第1天和第7天的住院情况;住院研究中的住院时间(LOS)。次要结局包括临床严重程度参数、医疗保健利用情况、肺功能、症状、生活质量及不良事件。
两位作者独立提取关于研究和参与者特征、干预措施及结局的数据。我们评估了偏倚风险并对证据强度进行分级。我们分别使用随机效应模型对住院和门诊结果进行Meta分析。我们预先设定了亚组分析,包括方案中使用的支气管扩张剂的联合应用。
我们纳入了17项试验(2596名参与者);3项试验总体偏倚风险较低。基线严重程度、糖皮质激素方案、对照措施及结局存在异质性。与安慰剂相比,糖皮质激素在第1天和第7天并未显著减少门诊住院情况(合并风险比(RRs)分别为0.92;95%置信区间(CI)0.78至1.08以及0.86;95%CI 0.7至1.06)。对住院患者的住院时间无益处(平均差值-0.18天;95%CI -0.39至0.04)。一项低偏倚风险的大型析因RCT的未调整结果发现,高剂量全身应用地塞米松与吸入肾上腺素联合使用可减少第7天的住院情况(基线住院风险26%;RR 0.65;95%CI 0.44至0.95;需治疗人数11;95%CI 7至76),短期不良反应无差异。其他比较在主要结局方面未显示出相关差异。
现有证据不支持全身应用或吸入糖皮质激素对住院情况或住院时间有临床相关影响。地塞米松与肾上腺素联合使用可能减少门诊住院情况,但结果为探索性且安全性数据有限。未来研究应进一步评估联合治疗的疗效、不良事件及适用性。