David Langton1, Alvin Ing2, David Fielding3, Nicole Hersch4, Joy Sha5, Virginia Plummer6, Francis Thien7. 1. Department of Thoracic Medicine, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, VIC, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. Electronic address: davidlangton@phcn.vic.gov.au. 2. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Department of Thoracic Medicine, Concord Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 3. Department of Thoracic Medicine, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, Australia. 4. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 5. Department of Thoracic Medicine, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, VIC, Australia. 6. Department of Thoracic Medicine, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, VIC, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 7. Faculty of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Eastern Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials of bronchial thermoplasty (BT) were conducted in patients with a baseline FEV1 greater than 50%. There is a paucity of data regarding BT in patients with more severe obstruction, and consequently these patients are often excluded from receiving BT. The purpose of this study was to compare safety and efficacy outcomes in a large cohort of patients with an FEV1 less than 50% with those of a cohort of less obstructed patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients with severe asthma were drawn from the Australian BT Registry. Patients were grouped into (1) those with a baseline prebronchodilator FEV1 % predicted < 50% (n = 32) or (2) those with an FEV1 ≥ 50% (n = 36). Adverse outcomes were defined as (1) remaining in hospital longer than the planned 24-hour admission posttreatment or (2) being readmitted to hospital for any cause within 30 days of a treatment. Efficacy outcomes were evaluated 6 months after BT. RESULTS: More severely obstructed patients were no more likely to have experienced any adverse event. Significant improvements in Asthma Control Questionnaire score, exacerbation frequency, reliever medication use, and requirement for daily oral steroids were observed in both groups, and were of a similar degree. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that BT can confidently be offered to patients with asthma with an FEV1 that is 30% to 50% of predicted without risk of more frequent or more severe adverse events, and with the expectation of the same degree of response as patients with better lung function.
BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials of bronchial thermoplasty (BT) were conducted in patients with a baseline FEV1 greater than 50%. There is a paucity of data regarding BT in patients with more severe obstruction, and consequently these patients are often excluded from receiving BT. The purpose of this study was to compare safety and efficacy outcomes in a large cohort of patients with an FEV1 less than 50% with those of a cohort of less obstructed patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients with severe asthma were drawn from the Australian BT Registry. Patients were grouped into (1) those with a baseline prebronchodilator FEV1 % predicted < 50% (n = 32) or (2) those with an FEV1 ≥ 50% (n = 36). Adverse outcomes were defined as (1) remaining in hospital longer than the planned 24-hour admission posttreatment or (2) being readmitted to hospital for any cause within 30 days of a treatment. Efficacy outcomes were evaluated 6 months after BT. RESULTS: More severely obstructed patients were no more likely to have experienced any adverse event. Significant improvements in Asthma Control Questionnaire score, exacerbation frequency, reliever medication use, and requirement for daily oral steroids were observed in both groups, and were of a similar degree. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that BT can confidently be offered to patients with asthma with an FEV1 that is 30% to 50% of predicted without risk of more frequent or more severe adverse events, and with the expectation of the same degree of response as patients with better lung function.