Chest 2001 Jun;119(6):1840-9
Predictors of outcome for patients with COPD requiring invasive mechanical ventilation.
Nevins ML, Epstein SK
Pulmonary and Critical Care Division, New England Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
INTRODUCTION: Accurate outcomes data and predictors of outcomes are fundamental to the effective care of patients with COPD and in guiding them and their families through end-of-life decisions. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 166 patients using prospectively gathered data in patients with COPD who required mechanical ventilation for acute respiratory failure of diverse etiologies. RESULTS: The in-hospital mortality rate for the entire cohort was 28% but fell to 12% for patients with a COPD exacerbation and without a comorbid illness. Univariate analysis showed a higher mortality rate among those patients who required > 72 h of mechanical ventilation (37% vs 16%; p < 0.01), those without previous episodes of mechanical ventilation (33% vs 11%; p < 0.01), and those with a failed extubation attempt (36% vs 7%; p = 0.0001). With multiple logistical regression, higher acute physiology score measured 6 h after the onset of mechanical ventilation, presence of malignancy, presence of APACHE (acute physiology and chronic health evaluation) II-associated comorbidity, and the need for mechanical ventilation > or = 72 h were independent predictors of poor outcome. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that among variables available within the first 6 h of mechanical ventilation, the presence of comorbidity and a measure of the severity of the acute illness are predictors of in-hospital mortality among patients with COPD and acute respiratory failure. The occurrence of extubation failure or the need for mechanical ventilation beyond 72 h also portends a worse prognosis.
PMID: 11399713, UI: 21292606
Chest 2001 Jun;119(6):1820-6
Underestimation of nocturnal hypoxemia due to monitoring conditions in patients with COPD.
Brijker F, van den Elshout FJ, Heijdra YF, Folgering HT
Department of Pulmonology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands. email@example.com
STUDY OBJECTIVES: COPD patients run a risk of developing nocturnal oxygen desaturation. When evaluating patients with nocturnal hypoxemia, an unfamiliar hospital environment and the monitoring equipment may cause sleep disturbances. It was hypothesized that increased sleep disruption will lead to fewer instances of desaturation during a night of monitoring. DESIGN:The following forms of monitoring were evaluated prospectively on 3 nights for each patient: oximetry at home; polysomnography (PSG) at home; and PSG in the hospital. SETTING: Department of Pulmonology, Rijnstate Hospital Arnhem, The Netherlands. PATIENTS: Fourteen stable COPD patients (7 men; median age, 71.5 years; age range, 59 to 81 years; FEV(1), 32.5% predicted; FEV(1) range, 19 to 70% predicted) participated in the study. All subjects had significant instances of nocturnal arterial oxygen desaturation. Those patients with a sleep-related breathing disorder or cardiac failure were excluded from the study. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The mean nocturnal arterial oxygen saturation (SaO(2)) level was higher during PSG monitoring at home (89.7%; range, 77 to 93%) than during oximetry monitoring (88.5%; range, 80 to 92%) [p < 0.025]. The fraction of time spent in hypoxemia (ie, SaO(2) < 90%) was lower during PSG monitoring at home (40.8%; range, 5 to 100%) than during oximetry monitoring (59.9%; range, 6 to 100%) [p < 0.01]. Desaturation time (DeltaSaO(2) > 4%) was lower during PSG monitoring at home (22.1%; range, 3 to 63%) during PSG monitoring at home than during oximetry monitoring (50.4%; range, 4 to 91%) [p < 0.01]. A correction for actual sleep during PSG monitoring reduced the differences between PSG monitoring at home and oximetry monitoring, although a difference in the desaturation time remained (PSG monitoring at home, 31.9% [range, 2 to 75%]; oximetry monitoring, 50.4% [range, 4 to 91%]) [p = 0.041]. A comparison of sleep architectures for nights when PSG was being monitored showed a higher arousal index in the hospital than at home (PSG monitoring in the hospital, 5.6 arousals per hour [range, 2 to 16 arousals per hour]; PSG monitoring at home, 2.5 arousals per hour [range, 1 to 6 arousals per hour]) [p < 0.025], but no differences in SaO(2) levels were found between PSG monitoring at home and PSG monitoring in the hospital. CONCLUSION: The artifacts due to sleep-monitoring equipment may cause an underestimation of the degree of nocturnal hypoxemia in COPD patients. The addition of an unfamiliar environment causes more sleep disruption, but this does not affect nocturnal SaO(2) levels further.
PMID: 11399710, UI: 21292603
Chest 2001 Jun;119(6):1696-704
Is it really useful to repeat outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation programs in patients with chronic airway obstruction? A 2-year controlled study.
Foglio K, Bianchi L, Ambrosino N
Fondazione S. Maugeri IRCCS, Pulmonary Rehabilitation and Lung Function Unit, Scientific Institute of Gussago, Gussago, Italy.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To answer the following questions: in patients with chronic airway obstruction (CAO), (1) can pulmonary rehabilitation lead to similar short-term gains at successive, yearly interventions, and (2) is there any real clinical or physiologic long-term benefit by yearly repetition of pulmonary rehabilitation programs (PRPs)? DESIGN: Randomized, controlled clinical study. SETTING: Pulmonary rehabilitation center. PATIENTS: Sixty-one CAO patients studied 1 year after completing an initial 8-week outpatient PRP (PRP1). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly classified into two groups. A second PRP (PRP2) was completed by the first group (group 1) but not by the second group (group 2). One year later, a third PRP (PRP3) was performed by both groups. MEASUREMENTS: Lung function, cycloergometry, walking test, dyspnea, and health-related quality of life (HRQL) were assessed before and after PRP2, and before and after PRP3. The numbers of hospitalizations and exacerbations over the year were also recorded. RESULTS: Complete data sets were obtained from 36 patients (17 patients in group 1 and 19 patients in group 2). The two groups did not differ in any parameter either before PRP1, after PRP1, or at randomization. There was no significant change over time for airway obstruction in either group. After PRP2, exercise tolerance, dyspnea, and HRQL improved in group 1. Nevertheless, 1 year later, patients of group 1 did not differ from patients of group 2 in any outcome parameter, such that in comparison to before PRP1, only HRQL was still better in both groups 24 months after PRP1. Yearly hospitalizations and exacerbations per patient significantly decreased in both groups in the 2 years following PRP1, when compared to the 2 years prior. Nevertheless, at the 24-month follow-up visit, a further reduction in yearly exacerbations was observed only in group 1 but not in group 2 in comparison to what was observed at the 12-month follow-up visit. The PRP3 resulted in improvement in exercise tolerance in both groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with CAO, an outpatient PRP can achieve benefits in HRQL and a decreased number of hospitalizations, which persist for a period of 2 years. Successive, yearly interventions lead to similar short-term gains but do not result in additive long-term physiologic benefits. Further reduction in yearly exacerbations seems to be the main benefit of an additional PRP.
Controlled clinical trial
Randomized controlled trial
PMID: 11399693, UI: 21292586
Chest 2001 Jun;119(6):1691-5
Gender bias in the diagnosis of COPD.
Chapman KR, Tashkin DP, Pye DJ
Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. firstname.lastname@example.org
BACKGROUND: COPD is thought to be more prevalent among men than women, a finding usually attributed to higher smoking rates and more frequent occupational exposures of significance for men. However, smoking prevalence has increased among women and there is evidence that women may be more susceptible to the adverse pulmonary function effects of smoking than men. There may also be underdiagnosis and misdiagnosis of COPD in both sexes because objective measures of lung function are underused. OBJECTIVES: We undertook the present study to determine if there is gender bias in the diagnosis of COPD, such that women are less likely than men to receive a diagnosis of COPD. We also attempted to determine if underuse of lung function measurements was a factor in any bias detected. METHODS: We surveyed a random sample of 192 primary-care physicians (96 American and 96 Canadian; 154 men and 38 women) using a hypothetical case presentation and a structured interview. The case of cough and dyspnea in a smoker was presented in six versions differing only in the age and sex of the patient. After presentation of the history and physical findings, physicians were asked to state the most probable diagnosis and to choose the diagnostic studies needed. Physicians were then presented with spirometric findings of moderate or severe obstruction without significant bronchodilator response, and the questions repeated. Finally, the negative outcome of an oral steroid trial was described. RESULTS: Initially, COPD was given as the most probable diagnosis significantly more often for men than women (58% vs 42%; p < 0.05). The likelihood of a COPD diagnosis increased significantly and initial differences between sexes decreased as objective information was provided. After spirometry, COPD diagnosis rates for men and women were 74% vs 66% (p = not significant); after the steroid trial 85% vs 79% (p = not significant). Only 22% of physicians would have requested spirometry after the initial presentation. CONCLUSIONS: In North America, primary-care physicians underdiagnosed COPD, particularly in women. Spirometry reduces the risk of underdiagnosis and gender bias but is underused.
Randomized controlled trial
PMID: 11399692, UI: 21292585
Chest 2001 Jun;119(6):1661-70
Salmeterol plus theophylline combination therapy in the treatment of COPD.
ZuWallack RL, Mahler DA, Reilly D, Church N, Emmett A, Rickard K, Knobil K
Section of Pulmonary Medicine, St. Francis Hospital and Medical Center, Hartford, CT 06105, USA.
BACKGROUND: Patients with COPD often require multiple therapies to improve lung function and decrease symptoms and exacerbations. Salmeterol and theophylline are indicated for the treatment of COPD, but the use of these agents in combination has not been extensively studied. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of salmeterol plus theophylline vs either agent alone in COPD. METHODS: Randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group trial in 943 patients with COPD. After an open-label theophylline titration period (serum levels, 10 to 20 microg/mL), patients were randomly assigned to receive salmeterol (42 microg bid) plus theophylline, salmeterol (42 microg bid), or theophylline for 12 weeks. Serial pulmonary function tests were completed on day 1 and treatment week 12. Patients kept diary cards and noted their peak flow rates, symptom scores, and albuterol use, and periodically completed quality-of-life and dyspnea questionnaires. RESULTS: All three groups significantly improved compared with baseline. Combination treatment with salmeterol plus theophylline provided significantly (p < or = 0.045) greater improvements in pulmonary function; significantly (p < or = 0.048) greater decreases in symptoms, dyspnea, and albuterol use; and significantly fewer COPD exacerbations (p = 0.023 vs theophylline). In general, treatment with salmeterol provided greater improvement in lung function and satisfaction with treatment compared with theophylline. Salmeterol treatment was also associated with significantly fewer drug-related adverse events (p < or = 0.042) than either treatment that included theophylline. The safety profile (adverse events, vital signs, and ECG findings) of the two treatments that included theophylline were similar. CONCLUSION: Patients with COPD may benefit from combination treatment with salmeterol plus theophylline, without a resulting increase in adverse events or other adverse sequelae.
Randomized controlled trial
PMID: 11399688, UI: 21292581
Zurück zu Übersicht über Abstracts