Gustavo J Rodrigo1, José A Castro-Rodríguez. 1. Departamento de Emergencia, Hospital Central de las Fuerzas Armadas, Av. 8 de Octubre 3020, Montevideo 11300, Uruguay. gustavo.javier.rodrigo@gmail.com
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intermittent ICS treatment with SABA in response to symptoms, is an emerging strategy for control of mild-to-moderate asthma, and recurrent wheezing. This systematic revue compares the efficacy of daily vs. intermittent ICS among preschoolers, children and adults with persistent wheezing and mild to moderate stable persistent asthma. METHODS: Systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled trials with a minimum of 8 weeks of daily (daily ICS with rescue SABA during exacerbations) vs. intermittent ICS (ICS plus SABA at the onset of symptoms), were retrieved through different databases. Primary outcome was asthma exacerbations; secondary outcomes were pulmonary function tests, symptoms, days without symptoms, SABA use, corticosteroids use, days without rescue medication use, expired nitric oxide and serious adverse events. RESULTS: Seven trials (1367 participants) met inclusion criteria there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of asthma exacerbations between those with daily vs. intermittent ICS (0.96; 95% CI: 0.86, 1.06, I(2) = 0%). In the sub-group analysis, no differences were seen in duration of studies, step-up strategy or age. However, compared to intermittent ICS, the daily ICS group had a significant increase in asthma-free days and non-significant decreases in rescue SABA use and exhaled nitric oxide measurement. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences between daily and intermittent ICS in reducing the incidence of asthma exacerbations was found. However, the daily ICS strategy was superior in many secondary outcomes. Therefore, this study suggests to not change daily for intermittent ICS use among preschoolers, children with persistent wheezing and adults with mild-to-moderate stable persistent asthma. International prospective register of systematic reviews http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ (CRD42012003228).
BACKGROUND: Intermittent ICS treatment with SABA in response to symptoms, is an emerging strategy for control of mild-to-moderate asthma, and recurrent wheezing. This systematic revue compares the efficacy of daily vs. intermittent ICS among preschoolers, children and adults with persistent wheezing and mild to moderate stable persistent asthma. METHODS: Systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled trials with a minimum of 8 weeks of daily (daily ICS with rescue SABA during exacerbations) vs. intermittent ICS (ICS plus SABA at the onset of symptoms), were retrieved through different databases. Primary outcome was asthma exacerbations; secondary outcomes were pulmonary function tests, symptoms, days without symptoms, SABA use, corticosteroids use, days without rescue medication use, expired nitric oxide and serious adverse events. RESULTS: Seven trials (1367 participants) met inclusion criteria there was no statistically significant difference in the rate of asthma exacerbations between those with daily vs. intermittent ICS (0.96; 95% CI: 0.86, 1.06, I(2) = 0%). In the sub-group analysis, no differences were seen in duration of studies, step-up strategy or age. However, compared to intermittent ICS, the daily ICS group had a significant increase in asthma-free days and non-significant decreases in rescue SABA use and exhaled nitric oxide measurement. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences between daily and intermittent ICS in reducing the incidence of asthma exacerbations was found. However, the daily ICS strategy was superior in many secondary outcomes. Therefore, this study suggests to not change daily for intermittent ICS use among preschoolers, children with persistent wheezing and adults with mild-to-moderate stable persistent asthma. International prospective register of systematic reviews http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ (CRD42012003228).
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
Authors: Michael R Gionfriddo; John B Hagan; Christina R Hagan; Gerald W Volcheck; Ana Castaneda-Guarderas; Matthew A Rank Journal: Allergy Asthma Proc Date: 2015 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.587
Authors: Marzia Duse; Francesca Santamaria; Maria Carmen Verga; Marcello Bergamini; Giovanni Simeone; Lucia Leonardi; Giovanna Tezza; Annamaria Bianchi; Annalisa Capuano; Fabio Cardinale; Giovanni Cerimoniale; Massimo Landi; Monica Malventano; Mariangela Tosca; Attilio Varricchio; Anna Maria Zicari; Carlo Alfaro; Salvatore Barberi; Paolo Becherucci; Roberto Bernardini; Paolo Biasci; Carlo Caffarelli; Valeria Caldarelli; Carlo Capristo; Serenella Castronuovo; Elena Chiappini; Renato Cutrera; Giovanna De Castro; Luca De Franciscis; Fabio Decimo; Iride Dello Iacono; Lucia Diaferio; Maria Elisa Di Cicco; Caterina Di Mauro; Cristina Di Mauro; Dora Di Mauro; Francesco Di Mauro; Gabriella Di Mauro; Mattia Doria; Raffaele Falsaperla; Valentina Ferraro; Vassilios Fanos; Elena Galli; Daniele Giovanni Ghiglioni; Luciana Indinnimeo; Ahmad Kantar; Adima Lamborghini; Amelia Licari; Riccardo Lubrano; Stefano Luciani; Francesco Macrì; Gianluigi Marseglia; Alberto Giuseppe Martelli; Luigi Masini; Fabio Midulla; Domenico Minasi; Vito Leonardo Miniello; Michele Miraglia Del Giudice; Sergio Renzo Morandini; Germana Nardini; Agostino Nocerino; Elio Novembre; Giovanni Battista Pajno; Francesco Paravati; Giorgio Piacentini; Cristina Piersantelli; Gabriella Pozzobon; Giampaolo Ricci; Valter Spanevello; Renato Turra; Stefania Zanconato; Melissa Borrelli; Alberto Villani; Giovanni Corsello; Giuseppe Di Mauro; Diego Peroni Journal: Ital J Pediatr Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 2.638