4.7 Review

How Do Dual Long-Acting Bronchodilators Prevent Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease?

出版社

AMER THORACIC SOC
DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201609-1794CI

关键词

hyperinflation; inflammation; inhaled corticosteroid; mucus

资金

  1. Novartis Pharma AG (Basel, Switzerland)
  2. Medical Research Council [G0800570, G1001365] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0513-10077, NF-SI-0510-10270] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [G1001365, G0800570] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Decreasing the frequency and severity of exacerbations is one of the main goals of treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Several studies have documented that long-acting bronchodilators can reduce exacerbation rate and/or severity, and others have shown that combinations of long-acting beta(2)-adrenergic agonists (LABAs) and long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) provide greater reductions in exacerbation frequency than either their monocomponents or LABA/inhaled corticosteroid combinations in patients at low and high risk for these events. In this review, small groups of experts critically evaluated mechanisms potentially responsible for the increased benefit of LABA/LAMA combinations over single long-acting bronchodilators or LABA/inhaled corticosteroids in decreasing exacerbation. These included effects on lung hyperinflation and mechanical stress, inflammation, excessive mucus production with impairedmucociliary clearance, and symptom severity. The data assembled and analyzed by each group were reviewed by all authors and combined into this manuscript. Available clinical results support the possibility that effects of LABA/LAMA combinations on hyperinflation, mucociliary clearance, and symptom severity may all contribute to decreasing exacerbations. Although preclinical studies suggest LABAs and LAMAs have antiinflammatory effects, such effects have not been demonstrated yet in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据