S Mohammed1, S Goodacre. 1. Medical Care Research Unit, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effect of intravenous and nebulised magnesium sulphate upon hospital admissions and pulmonary function in adults and children with acute asthma. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and quasi-randomised trials of intravenous or nebulised magnesium sulphate in acute asthma. Trials were identified by searches of the electronic literature, relevant journal websites and conference proceedings, and contact with authors and experts. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis of the relative risk (RR) of hospital admission and the standardised mean difference (SMD) in pulmonary function. RESULTS: 24 studies (15 intravenous, 9 nebulised) incorporating 1669 patients were included. Intravenous treatment was associated in adults with weak evidence of an effect upon respiratory function (SMD 0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01 to 0.51; p = 0.05), but no significant effect upon hospital admission (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.08; p = 0.22), and in children with a significant effect upon respiratory function (SMD 1.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 3.08; p<0.001) and hospital admission (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.90; p = 0.005). Nebulised treatment was associated in adults with weak evidence of an effect upon respiratory function (SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.36; p = 0.09), and hospital admission (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.02; p = 0.06), and in children with no significant effect upon respiratory function (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -1.49 to 0.98; p = 0.69) or hospital admission (RR 2.0, 95% CI 0.19 to 20.93; p = 0.56). CONCLUSION: Intravenous magnesium sulphate appears to be an effective treatment in children. Further trials are needed of intravenous and nebulised magnesium sulphate in adults and nebulised magnesium sulphate in children.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the effect of intravenous and nebulised magnesium sulphate upon hospital admissions and pulmonary function in adults and children with acute asthma. METHODS: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and quasi-randomised trials of intravenous or nebulised magnesium sulphate in acute asthma. Trials were identified by searches of the electronic literature, relevant journal websites and conference proceedings, and contact with authors and experts. Data were pooled using random effects meta-analysis of the relative risk (RR) of hospital admission and the standardised mean difference (SMD) in pulmonary function. RESULTS: 24 studies (15 intravenous, 9 nebulised) incorporating 1669 patients were included. Intravenous treatment was associated in adults with weak evidence of an effect upon respiratory function (SMD 0.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.01 to 0.51; p = 0.05), but no significant effect upon hospital admission (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.08; p = 0.22), and in children with a significant effect upon respiratory function (SMD 1.94, 95% CI 0.80 to 3.08; p<0.001) and hospital admission (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.90; p = 0.005). Nebulised treatment was associated in adults with weak evidence of an effect upon respiratory function (SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.36; p = 0.09), and hospital admission (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.02; p = 0.06), and in children with no significant effect upon respiratory function (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -1.49 to 0.98; p = 0.69) or hospital admission (RR 2.0, 95% CI 0.19 to 20.93; p = 0.56). CONCLUSION: Intravenous magnesium sulphate appears to be an effective treatment in children. Further trials are needed of intravenous and nebulised magnesium sulphate in adults and nebulised magnesium sulphate in children.
Authors: M S Skorodin; M F Tenholder; B Yetter; K A Owen; R F Waller; S Khandelwahl; K Maki; T Rohail; N D'Alfonso Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 1995-03-13
Authors: Rachel Knightly; Stephen J Milan; Rodney Hughes; Jennifer A Knopp-Sihota; Brian H Rowe; Rebecca Normansell; Colin Powell Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-11-28
Authors: T E Albertson; M Schivo; N Gidwani; N J Kenyon; M E Sutter; A L Chan; S Louie Journal: Clin Rev Allergy Immunol Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 8.667