Intravenous isoproterenol infusion in children with severe hypercapnia due to status asthmaticus. Effects on ventilation, circulation, and clinical score

Clinical respiratory scales: which one should we use?

INTRODUCTION

There are countless clinical respiratory scales for acute dyspnoea. Most healthcare professionals choose one based on previous personal experience or following local practice, unaware of the implications of their choice. The lack of critical comparisons between those different tools has been a widespread problem that only recently has begun to be addressed via score validation studies. Here we try to assess and compare the quality criteria of measurement properties of acute dyspnoea scores. Areas covered: A literature review was conducted by searching the PubMed database. Forty-five documents were deemed eligible as they reported the use or building of clinical scales, using at least two parameters, and applied these to an acute episode of respiratory dyspnoea. Our primary focus was the description of the validity, reliability and utility of 41 suitable scoring instruments. Differences in sample selection, study design, rater profiles and potential methodological shortcomings were also addressed. Expert commentary: All acute dyspnoea scores lack complete validation. In particular, the areas of measurement error and interpretability have not been addressed correctly by any of the tools reviewed. Frequent modification of pre-existing scores (in items composition and/or name), differences in study design and discrepancies in reviewed sources also hinder the search for an adequate tool.

A Critical Asthma Standardized Clinical and Management Plan Reduces Duration of Critical Asthma Therapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Reduction of critical asthma management time can reduce intensive care utilization. The goal of this study was to determine whether a Critical Asthma Standardized Clinical Assessment and Management Plan (SCAMP) can decrease length of critical asthma management time.

METHODS

This retrospective study compared critical asthma management times in children managed before and after implementation of a Critical Asthma SCAMP. The SCAMP used an asthma severity score management scheme to guide stepwise escalation and weaning of therapies. The SCAMP guided therapy until continuous albuterol nebulization (CAN) was weaned to intermittent albuterol every 2 hours (q2h). Because the SCAMP was part of a quality improvement initiative in which all patients received a standardized therapy, informed consent was waived. The study was conducted in Medicine ICU and Intermediate Care Units in a tertiary care freestanding children's hospital. Children ≥2 years of age who had CAN initiated in the emergency department and were admitted to the Division of Medicine Critical Care with status asthmaticus were included. The time to q2h dosing from initiation of CAN was compared between the baseline and SCAMP cohorts. Adverse events were compared. The Mann-Whitney test was used for analysis; P values <.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

There were 150 baseline and 123 SCAMP patients eligible for analysis. There was a decrease in median time to q2h dosing after the SCAMP (baseline, 21.6 hours [interquartile range, 3.2-32.3 hours]; SCAMP, 14.2 hours [interquartile range, 9.0-23.1 hours]; P < .01). There were no differences in adverse events or readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

A Critical Asthma SCAMP was effective in decreasing time on continuous albuterol.

The development of pediatric critical care medicine at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia: an interview with Dr. John J. 'Jack' Downes

Dr. John J. 'Jack' Downes (1930-), the anesthesiologist-in-chief at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (1972-1996), has made numerous contributions to pediatric anesthesia and critical care medicine through a broad spectrum of research on chronic respiratory failure, status asthmaticus, postoperative risks of apnea in premature infants, and home-assisted mechanical ventilation. However, his defining moment was in January 1967, when The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia inaugurated its pediatric intensive care unit--the first of its kind in North America. During his tenure, he and his colleagues trained an entire generation of pediatric anesthesiologists and intensivists and set a standard of care and professionalism that continues to the present day. Based on an interview with Dr. Downes, this article reviews a career that advanced pediatric anesthesia and critical care medicine and describes the development of that first pediatric intensive care unit at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

Addition of intravenous beta(2)-agonists to inhaled beta(2)-agonists for acute asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled beta-agonist therapy is central to the management of acute asthma. This review evaluates the benefit of an additional use of intravenous beta(2)-agonist agents.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefit of adding intravenous (IV) beta(2)-agonists to inhaled beta(2)-agonist therapy for acute asthma treated in the emergency department.

SEARCH METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Register which is a compilation of systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL as well as handsearching of 20 respiratory journals. Bibliographies from included studies and known reviews were also searched. Primary authors and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies. The search was performed in September 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only RCTs were considered for inclusion. Studies were included if patients presented to the emergency department with acute asthma and were treated with IV beta(2)-agonists with inhaled beta(2)-agonist therapy and existing standard treatments versus inhaled beta(2)-agonists and existing standard treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and confirmed their findings with corresponding authors of trials. We obtained missing data from authors or calculated from data present in the papers. We used fixed-effect model for odds ratios (OR) and for mean differences (MD) we used both fixed-effect and random-effects models and reported 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

From 109 potentially relevant studies only three (104 patients) met our inclusion criteria: Bogie 2007 (46 children), Browne 1997 (29 children) and Nowak 2010 (29 adults). Bogie 2007 investigated the addition of intravenous terbutaline to high dose nebulised albuterol in children with acute severe asthma, requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Browne 1997 investigated the benefit of adding intravenous salbutamol to inhaled salbutamol in children with acute severe asthma in the emergency department. Nowak 2010 investigated addition of IV bedoradrine to standard care (nebulised albuterol, ipratropium and oral corticosteroids) among adults, and was reported as a conference abstract only.There was no significant advantage (OR 0.29; 95%CI 0.06 to 1.38, one trial, 29 adults) for adding IV bedoradrine to standard care (nebulised albuterol, ipratropium and oral corticosteroids) with regard to hospitalisation rates.Various outcome indicators for the length of stay were reported among the trials. Browne 1997 reported a significantly shorter recovery time (in terms of cessation of 30 minute salbutamol) for children in the IV salbutamol with inhaled salbutamol group (four hours) versus the 11.1 hours for the inhaled salbutamol group (P = 0.03). Time to cessation of hourly nebuliser was also significantly shorter (P = 0.02) for the IV plus inhaled salbutamol group (11.5 hours versus 21.2 hours), and they were ready for emergency patient discharge on average 9.7 hours earlier than the inhaled salbutamol group (P < 0.05). In a paediatric ICU study Bogie 2007 reported no significant advantage in length of paediatric ICU admission (hours) for adding IV terbutaline to nebulised albuterol (MD -12.95, 95% CI: -38.74, 12.84).Browne 1997 reported there were only six out of 14 children with a pulmonary index score above six in the IV plus inhaled salbutamol group at two hours compared with 14 of the 15 in the inhaled salbutamol group (P = 0.02)In Browne 1997 there was a higher proportion of tremor in the IV plus inhaled salbutamol group than in the inhaled salbutamol group (P < 0.02). Nowak 2010 did not report any statistically significant adverse effects associated with adding IV bedoradrine to standard care (nebulised albuterol, ipratropium and oral corticosteroids). Troponin levels were elevated in three children in the IV terbutaline + nebulised albuterol group at 12 and 24 hours in Bogie 2007

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is very limited evidence from one study (Browne 1997) to support the use of IV beta(2)-agonists in children with severe acute asthma with respect to shorter recovery time, and similarly there is limited evidence (again from one study Browne 1997) suggesting benefit with regard to pulmonary index scores; however this advantage needs to be considered carefully in relation to the increased side effects associated with IV beta(2)-agonists. We identified no significant benefits for adults with severe acute asthma. Until more, adequately powered, high quality clinical trials in this area are conducted it is not possible to form a robust evaluation of the addition of IV beta(2)-agonists in children or adults with severe acute asthma.

Intravenous beta(2)-agonists versus intravenous aminophylline for acute asthma

BACKGROUND

Inhaled beta(2)-agonist therapy is central to the management of acute asthma. For rapid bronchodilation in severe cases, penetration of inhaled drug to the affected small conducting airway may be impeded, and the intravenous (IV) rather than inhaled administration of bronchodilators may provide an earlier response. IV beta(2)-agonist agents and IV aminophylline may also be considered as additional interventions in this setting and this review compares IV beta-agonist agents and IV aminophylline in the treatment of people with acute asthma.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefit of IV beta(2)-agonists versus IV aminophylline for acute asthma treated in the emergency department and in patients admitted to hospital with acute severe asthma.

SEARCH METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Register, which is compiled from systematic searches of bibliographic databases as well as handsearching of respiratory journals and conference abstracts. The latest search was run in September 2012. We searched bibliographies from included studies and known reviews were also searched. Primary authors and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs of patients who presented to the emergency department with acute asthma, and patients admitted to hospital with acute severe asthma, and were treated with IV beta(2)-agonists versus IV aminophylline. Two review authors independently selected potentially relevant articles and selected articles for inclusion. Methodological quality was independently assessed using two scoring systems and two review authors.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two review authors. Missing data were obtained from authors or calculated from data present in the papers. Trials were combined using a random-effects model for odds ratios (OR) or mean differences (MD) and reported with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria and in total they included 350 patients. However, opportunities to combine these studies in meta-analyses were limited by the variations in the range of outcomes reported in the trials.Length of stayTwo studies reported length of stay. They were both paediatric trials (with one in paediatric intensive care unit), and there was no significant difference between the two groups (MD 23.19 hours; 95% CI -2.40 to 48.77 hours; 2 studies; N = 73). Individual separate MD analyses for the two studies also indicated no significant difference between the aminophylline and beta(2)-agonist on this outcome. However, this finding should be interpreted with caution owing to the small number of trials and participants the analysis.Pulmonary functionThere were no significant differences in the sequential or summative pulmonary function demonstrated across the studies.Heart rateData for serial heart rates were reported in three studies at various points from 15 to 60 minutes and in each case there were no significant differences between people in the IV aminophylline or beta(2)-agonist groups. The difference between the two groups with respect to final heart rate was statistically significant (MD 10.00; 95% CI 0.99 to 19.01), although these data are from a single, small study and should be interpreted with caution.Adverse effectsThe analyses for giddiness (OR 59.22; 95% CI 2.80 to 1253.05; 1 study; N = 30), nausea/vomiting (where reported as a combined outcome) (OR 14.18; 95% CI 1.62 to 124.52; 2 studies; N = 96) and nausea (OR 6.53; 95% CI 1.60 to 26.72; 2 studies; N = 49) all significantly favoured beta(2)-agonists. In view of the very small number of studies and number of patients contributing to these analyses these results should be interpreted with caution. A closely related review considering the possible benefits of adding IV aminophylline to beta-agonists in adults with acute asthma also indicates a higher incidence of adverse effects associated with IV aminophylline.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the included RCTs there was no consistent evidence favouring either IV beta(2)-agonists or IV aminophylline for patients with acute asthma. The opportunity to draw clear conclusions is limited by the heterogeneity of outcomes evaluated and the small sample sizes in the included studies. It is recommended that these data should be viewed carefully alongside the conclusions from separate Cochrane reviews comparing IV beta(2)-agonists plus inhaled beta(2)-agonists versus inhaled beta(2)-agonists alone and IV aminophylline plus inhaled beta(2)-agonists versus inhaled beta(2)-agonists alone.

Intravenous beta2-agonists for acute asthma in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Inhaled beta-agonist therapy is central to the management of acute asthma. The use of intravenous beta-agonist agents may also be beneficial in this setting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefit of intravenous (IV) beta2-agonists for severe acute asthma treated in the emergency department.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Randomised controlled trials (RCT) were identified using the Cochrane Airways Group Register which is a compilation of systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL as well as hand searching of 20 respiratory journals. Bibliographies from included studies and known reviews were also searched. Primary authors and content experts were contacted to identify eligible studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only RCTs were considered for inclusion. Studies were included if patients presented to the emergency department with acute asthma and were treated with IV selective or nonselective beta2-agonists versus placebo, inhaled beta2-agonists, or other standard of care. Pulmonary function, vital signs, arterial gasses, adverse effects, and/or clinical success could be reported as outcome measures. Two reviewers independently selected potentially relevant articles and selected articles for inclusion. Methodological quality was independently assessed using two scoring systems and two reviewers.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted independently by two reviewers, and confirmed with corresponding authors. Missing data were obtained from authors or calculated from data present in the papers. Trials were combined using a random effects model for odds ratios (OR) or weighted mean differences (WMD) and reported with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

MAIN RESULTS

From 746 identified references, 55 potentially relevant articles were identified and 15 were included. The trials included 584 patients. Overall, selective IV beta2-agonist use conferred no advantage over the comparator regimes. For example, it was associated with a lower PEFR after 60 mins compared to inhaled beta2-agonist, although the difference was not statistically significant (-24.7 l/min; 95%CI 2.9, -52.3). There was no difference in heart rate (4.5 bpm; 95% CI -4.9, 14.0). In the well performed blinded studies there was no difference in autonomic side effects between treatments (Odds Ratio 2.2 (95%CI 0.9, 5.7).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence to support the use of IV beta2-agonists in patients with severe acute asthma. These drugs should be given by inhalation. No subgroups were identified in which the IV route should be considered.

Severe acute asthma in a community hospital pediatric intensive care unit: a ten years' experience

BACKGROUND

The clinical literature on the incidence and subsequent mortality of asthma has come primarily from the experiences of large tertiary referral centers, particularly in Western Europe and North America. Consequently, very little has been published on the incidence, management, and outcome of asthma in smaller, community-based intensive care units.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to explore the course and outcome of children with acute severe asthma treated within a community hospital PICU compared with those described in the literature from larger tertiary referral centers.

DESIGN

A retrospective analysis of 49 asthmatic children admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) over a 10-year period was performed.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

The mean age was 5.2 years (range 2 months to 16 years), and the male:female ratio was 3:1. Duration of symptoms prior to admission to hospital was less than 24 hours in 60.4% of the patients. The majority of patients was not treated with either inhaled or oral steroids before admission. Drugs used in the PICU included nebulized beta2-agonists, theophylline, steroids, intravenous salbutamol, and intravenous isoproterenol. Although a pharmacologic approach was successful in the majority of patients, intubation and mechanical ventilation were necessary for progressive hypercapnea, exhaustion, and cardiorespiratory arrest in 11/49 of these patients. The average stay in the ICU for our patient group was 2.4 days. Intubated patients had a mean average stay of 3.5 days. Two patients had pneumothorax related to positive pressure ventilation, requiring chest tube insertion for drainage. There were no deaths among the 49 patients admitted to our PICU.

CONCLUSIONS

These data show that for acute severe asthma, outcome is comparable in a community PICU to a tertiary referral institution. We conclude that early ICU admission along with close monitoring is important in reducing morbidity and mortality in children with severe asthma.

Clinical scores for acute asthma in pre-school children. A review of the literature

The objective of this paper was to evaluate the applicability in research and clinical practice of clinical scores for acute asthma in pre-school children. All instruments were reviewed according to a standardized set of criteria: purpose of the score, suitability for use in children, inter-observer agreement, validity and responsiveness. A Medline literature research resulted in 16 different clinical asthma scores, which have been developed to assess the severity of acute asthma, to predict the outcome of an attack, or to evaluate the response to treatment. Most asthma scores could be easily obtained in children. Three scores have been modified to facilitate application in a younger age-category. Inter-observer agreement has received little attention, although all scores contained items that require subjective judgement. The predictive validity was insufficient to justify the application of clinical scores as a decision rule for the admission or discharge of children with acute asthma. Asthma scores seem to be useful for assessing the severity of an attack and evaluating the response to therapy, but as yet there is insufficient information on the performance of the scores to justify a preference. Wheezing and retractions appear to be important items of any useful score for acute asthma.

The pharmacokinetics of isoproterenol in critically ill pediatric patients

The pharmacokinetics of isoproterenol (ISO) in infants and children have never been reported. The authors studied ISO pharmacokinetics in two disparate groups of pediatric intensive care unit patients: postoperative cardiac patients (POC, n = 10), and reactive airway disease patients (RAD, n = 9). In all, 44 blood samples were taken at steady-state from the 19 patients, whereas from 15 patients samples were also taken just before and after discontinuation of ISO infusion. There were 12 male and 7 female patients in the study, and their ages ranged from 2 days to 14 years. The average ISO dosing rate was 0.30 micrograms/kg/minute for the whole study population, ranging from 0.01 to 5.5 micrograms/kg/minute. The POC patients received a significantly lower dosing rate than the RAD patients (0.029 +/- 0.002 vs 0.50 +/- 0.21 micrograms/kg/minute, P < .0001); the average steady-state plasma concentrations of ISO were also lower in the POC patients (1.3 +/- 0.3 versus 13.9 +/- 4.9 ng/mL, P < .0001). The steady-state plasma concentration, normalized to a dosing rate of .05 micrograms/kg/minute, was 1.9 +/- 0.3 ng/mL for all patients, and the clearance was 42.5 +/- 5.0 mg/kg/minute. Postoperative cardiac patients had a significant higher normalized steady-state plasma concentration and moderately significant lower clearance than did RAD patients (2.1 +/- 0.3 versus 1.7 +/- 0.4 ng/mL, P < .05 and 33.2 +/- 4.9 versus 48.4 +/- 7.3, P < .06, respectively). The average plasma half-life of ISO was 4.2 +/- 1.5 minutes, and the volume of distribution was 216 +/- 57 mg/kg.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Beta-adrenergic agonists for acute, severe asthma

OBJECTIVE

To critically review the use of beta-adrenergic agonists in acute, severe asthma with particular focus on aerosol administration.

DATA SOURCES

English language articles published since 1971 on the use of beta-agonists for acute asthma. Studies were identified from bibliographies of book chapters, review articles, and other research articles.

STUDY SELECTION

All studies (21 total) comparing systemic with inhaled beta-agonists were reviewed, regardless of their design or outcome. Selected studies highlighting specific aspects of beta-agonist use in acute asthma such as beta-agonists versus other bronchodilators, aerosol delivery, and intravenous beta-agonists were also reviewed.

DATA EXTRACTION

Performed subjectively by the authors with specific aspects of quality discussed within the body of the article.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The beta-agonists provide superior bronchodilation in acute severe asthma compared with either the methylxanthines and/or anticholinergics. The majority of studies found aerosolized beta-agonists to be either as effective as or more effective than parenteral beta-agonists and to produce fewer adverse cardiovascular effects. Studies showing preference for parenteral therapy have either been of poor design or used low doses of an aerosolized beta-agonist. Based on studies of aerosol delivery, there is no advantage of jet nebulization over metered-dose inhalers; however, other aspects, including ease of administration, favor nebulization as the delivery method of choice. The articles recommending intravenous beta-agonists consist of a series of uncontrolled cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Aerosolized selective beta 2-agonists are the bronchodilator treatments of choice for acute, severe asthma. Attention to the details of dosing and delivery are required for optimal results. The final dose and dosing interval are determined by the patient's response. Intravenous beta-agonists are hazardous and cannot be recommended.