Departamento de Emergencia, Hospital Central de las Fuerzas Armadas, Av. 8 de Octubre 3020, Montevideo 11300, Uruguay.
Respir Med. 2013 Aug;107(8):1133-40. doi: 10.1016/j.rmed.2013.05.005. Epub 2013 Jun 14.
Intermittent ICS treatment with SABA in response to symptoms, is an emerging strategy for control of mild-to-moderate asthma, and recurrent wheezing. This systematic revue compares the efficacy of daily vs. intermittent ICS among preschoolers, children and adults with persistent wheezing and mild to moderate stable persistent asthma.
Systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled trials with a minimum of 8 weeks of daily (daily ICS with rescue SABA during exacerbations) vs. intermittent ICS (ICS plus SABA at the onset of symptoms), were retrieved through different databases. Primary outcome was asthma exacerbations; secondary outcomes were pulmonary function tests, symptoms, days without symptoms, SABA use, corticosteroids use, days without rescue medication use, expired nitric oxide and serious adverse events.
Seven trials (1367 participants) met inclusion criteria there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of asthma exacerbations between those with daily vs. intermittent ICS (0.96; 95% CI: 0.86, 1.06, I(2) = 0%). In the sub-group analysis, no differences were seen in duration of studies, step-up strategy or age. However, compared to intermittent ICS, the daily ICS group had a significant increase in asthma-free days and non-significant decreases in rescue SABA use and exhaled nitric oxide measurement.
No significant differences between daily and intermittent ICS in reducing the incidence of asthma exacerbations was found. However, the daily ICS strategy was superior in many secondary outcomes. Therefore, this study suggests to not change daily for intermittent ICS use among preschoolers, children with persistent wheezing and adults with mild-to-moderate stable persistent asthma. International prospective register of systematic reviews http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ (CRD42012003228).
针对症状间歇性使用 ICS 联合 SABA 治疗是控制轻中度哮喘和反复喘息的新兴策略。本系统综述比较了持续性喘息和轻中度持续稳定型哮喘的学龄前儿童、儿童和成人患者中每日 ICS 与间歇性 ICS 的疗效。
通过不同数据库检索了至少 8 周的每日(ICS 联合按需 SABA 缓解治疗)与间歇性 ICS(ICS 联合按需 SABA)治疗的随机、安慰剂对照试验的系统综述。主要结局为哮喘恶化;次要结局为肺功能检查、症状、无症状天数、SABA 使用、皮质激素使用、无缓解药物使用天数、呼气一氧化氮和严重不良事件。
7 项试验(1367 名参与者)符合纳入标准,每日 ICS 与间歇性 ICS 治疗组的哮喘恶化发生率无统计学差异(0.96;95%CI:0.86,1.06,I(2) = 0%)。在亚组分析中,研究持续时间、升级策略或年龄无差异。然而,与间歇性 ICS 相比,每日 ICS 组哮喘无恶化天数显著增加,而按需 SABA 使用和呼气一氧化氮测量显著减少。
每日 ICS 与间歇性 ICS 治疗在降低哮喘恶化发生率方面无显著差异。然而,每日 ICS 策略在许多次要结局方面具有优势。因此,本研究建议对于持续性喘息的学龄前儿童、儿童和轻中度稳定持续型哮喘的成人患者,不要将每日 ICS 方案转换为间歇性 ICS 方案。
国际前瞻性系统评价注册平台(http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/,CRD42012003228)。