O'Donnell Denis E, Elbehairy Amany F, Faisal Azmy, Neder J Alberto, Webb Katherine A
Respiratory Investigation Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen's University & Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Respiratory Investigation Unit, Department of Medicine, Queen's University & Kingston General Hospital, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Department of Chest Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2018 Jan;247:116-125. doi: 10.1016/j.resp.2017.10.001. Epub 2017 Oct 7.
This randomized, double-blind, crossover study examined the physiological rationale for using a dual long-acting bronchodilator (umeclidinium/vilanterol (UME/VIL)) versus its muscarinic-antagonist component (UME) as treatment for dyspnea and exercise intolerance in moderate COPD. After each 4-week treatment period, subjects performed pulmonary function and symptom-limited constant-work rate cycling tests with diaphragm electromyogram (EMGdi), esophageal (Pes), gastric (Pga) and transdiaphragmatic (Pdi) pressure measurements. Fourteen subjects completed the study. Both treatments improved spirometry and airway resistance. UME/VIL had larger increases in FEV (+0.14±0.23L, p<0.05) but no added reduction in lung hyperinflation compared with UME. Isotime during exercise after UME/VIL versus UME (p<0.05): "unpleasantness of breathing" fell 0.8±1.3 Borg units; mean expiratory flow and ventilation increased; Pdi and Pga decreased. There were no treatment differences in endurance time, breathing pattern, operating lung volumes, inspiratory neural drive (EMGdi) or respiratory muscle effort (Pes swings) during exercise. UME/VIL compared with UME was associated with reduced breathing unpleasantness reflecting improved airway and respiratory muscle function during exercise.
这项随机、双盲、交叉研究探讨了使用双重长效支气管扩张剂(乌美溴铵/维兰特罗(UME/VIL))与其毒蕈碱拮抗剂成分(UME)相比,作为中度慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者呼吸困难和运动不耐受治疗方法的生理学原理。在每个为期4周的治疗期后,受试者进行肺功能和症状限制的恒定工作率自行车测试,并测量膈肌肌电图(EMGdi)、食管压力(Pes)、胃内压力(Pga)和跨膈压(Pdi)。14名受试者完成了该研究。两种治疗方法均改善了肺量计测量结果和气道阻力。与UME相比,UME/VIL使第一秒用力呼气容积(FEV)有更大增加(增加0.14±0.23L,p<0.05),但在肺过度充气减少方面无额外效果。UME/VIL与UME相比,运动期间等时(p<0.05):“呼吸不适感”下降0.8±1.3 Borg单位;平均呼气流量和通气量增加;Pdi和Pga降低。运动期间的耐力时间、呼吸模式、有效肺容积、吸气神经驱动(EMGdi)或呼吸肌力量(Pes波动)在两种治疗方法之间无差异。与UME相比,UME/VIL可减轻呼吸不适感,这反映出运动期间气道和呼吸肌功能得到改善。