Kerget Buğra, Tekin Erdal, Çil Gizem, Çelik Kadir, Aksakal Alperen
Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Department of Pulmonary Diseases - Erzurum, Turkey.
Ataturk University, School of Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine - Erzurum, Turkey.
Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992). 2024 Dec 2;70(12):e20240861. doi: 10.1590/1806-9282.20240861. eCollection 2024.
In addition to oxygen support, bronchodilator therapy constitutes the most essential treatment step in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Our study aimed to compare the effectiveness of nebulizer treatments in patients who presented to the emergency department with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.
Our study included 60 Group E chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients admitted to the emergency department due to acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease between June and September 2023 (NCT: 06178068). Patients were randomized as follows: Group 1: jet nebulizer treatment; Group 2: dry air nebulizer treatment; and Group 3: classic nebulizer treatment.
While an increase in forced vital capacity (FVC) and forced expiratory volume 1 (FEV1) levels was observed in Group 1 patients (in the order of p=0.009 and 0.007), a decrease in residual volume (RV) and total lung capacity (TLC) levels was observed (p=0.02 and 0.05, respectively). At the same time, an increase in FEV1 levels was observed in Group 2 and 3 patients (p=0.04 and 0.04, respectively). A decrease was observed in RV and TLC levels (p=0.02, 0.05, 0.02, and 0.04, respectively). When comparing the respiratory function test parameters at the beginning and on the fifth day of treatment, FEV1 and peak expiratory flow 25/75 (PEF25/75) levels were higher in Group 1 patients than in Group 2 and 3 patients (p=0.01 and 0.02, respectively).
In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, jet nebulizer treatment is more effective regarding bronchodilator activity than other nebulizer treatments. However, dry air nebulizer treatment may be preferred in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients because it is easily applicable and sterilizable.
除氧疗支持外,支气管扩张剂治疗是慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者最基本的治疗步骤。我们的研究旨在比较雾化治疗对因慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重而就诊于急诊科患者的有效性。
我们的研究纳入了2023年6月至9月期间因慢性阻塞性肺疾病急性加重而入住急诊科的60例E组慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者(NCT:06178068)。患者被随机分组如下:第1组:喷射雾化器治疗;第2组:干空气雾化器治疗;第3组:传统雾化器治疗。
第1组患者的用力肺活量(FVC)和第1秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)水平升高(p值依次为0.009和0.007),同时残气量(RV)和肺总量(TLC)水平降低(分别为p=0.02和0.05)。同时,第2组和第3组患者的FEV1水平升高(分别为p=0.04和0.04)。RV和TLC水平降低(分别为p=0.02、0.05、0.02和0.04)。在比较治疗开始时和治疗第5天时的呼吸功能测试参数时,第1组患者的FEV1和呼气流量峰值25/75(PEF25/75)水平高于第2组和第3组患者(分别为p=0.01和0.02)。
在慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者中,喷射雾化器治疗在支气管扩张活性方面比其他雾化治疗更有效。然而,干空气雾化器治疗因其易于应用和可消毒,可能更受慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者青睐。