Gabriel Bolner, Yohanna Idsabella Rossi, Jonathan Costa Dall'Acqua, Artur Vestena Rossato, Fabiana Dolovitsch de Oliveira, Kauê Bolner, Gilberto Bueno Fischer, Janice Luisa Lukrafka, Helena Teresinha Mocelin
{"title":"作为12岁以下儿童哮喘附加治疗的长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Gabriel Bolner, Yohanna Idsabella Rossi, Jonathan Costa Dall'Acqua, Artur Vestena Rossato, Fabiana Dolovitsch de Oliveira, Kauê Bolner, Gilberto Bueno Fischer, Janice Luisa Lukrafka, Helena Teresinha Mocelin","doi":"10.1016/j.prrv.2025.04.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Children under 12 have fewer treatment options for uncontrolled asthma than adolescents and adults. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) can be used as an add-on therapy for asthma in adults, but the evidence in children is unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated LAMA as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in asthmatic children younger than 12. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis for lung function, asthma control, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed for different LAMA dosages.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four RCTs and two observational studies (n = 1210) were included in our systematic review. The pulmonary function tests indicated that LAMA at any dose significantly improved peak FEV1 (MD 86.16 mL; 95 %CI 18.62-153.71; p < 0.01) and FEF25-75 % (MD 0.2518L; 95 %CI 0.1971-0.3064; p < 0.01), while FVC (MD 9.69 mL; 95 %CI -34.57 to 53.95; p = 0.67) remained unchanged. Asthma control measured by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (MD -0.07; 95 %CI -0.08 to -0.06; p < 0.01) also favoured LAMA treatments. Nighttime awakenings and rescue treatment usage showed no significant differences between groups. Using LAMA was also associated with fewer adverse events (RR 0.88; 95 %CI 0.79-0.98; p = 0.021).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LAMA are safe and effective for moderate/severe asthma for children aged 6-11. Evidence is still slowly evolving for children younger than 6 years.</p>","PeriodicalId":19658,"journal":{"name":"Paediatric Respiratory Reviews","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Long-acting muscarinic antagonists as add-on treatment for asthma in children under age 12: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Gabriel Bolner, Yohanna Idsabella Rossi, Jonathan Costa Dall'Acqua, Artur Vestena Rossato, Fabiana Dolovitsch de Oliveira, Kauê Bolner, Gilberto Bueno Fischer, Janice Luisa Lukrafka, Helena Teresinha Mocelin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prrv.2025.04.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Children under 12 have fewer treatment options for uncontrolled asthma than adolescents and adults. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) can be used as an add-on therapy for asthma in adults, but the evidence in children is unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated LAMA as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in asthmatic children younger than 12. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis for lung function, asthma control, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed for different LAMA dosages.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four RCTs and two observational studies (n = 1210) were included in our systematic review. The pulmonary function tests indicated that LAMA at any dose significantly improved peak FEV1 (MD 86.16 mL; 95 %CI 18.62-153.71; p < 0.01) and FEF25-75 % (MD 0.2518L; 95 %CI 0.1971-0.3064; p < 0.01), while FVC (MD 9.69 mL; 95 %CI -34.57 to 53.95; p = 0.67) remained unchanged. Asthma control measured by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (MD -0.07; 95 %CI -0.08 to -0.06; p < 0.01) also favoured LAMA treatments. Nighttime awakenings and rescue treatment usage showed no significant differences between groups. Using LAMA was also associated with fewer adverse events (RR 0.88; 95 %CI 0.79-0.98; p = 0.021).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>LAMA are safe and effective for moderate/severe asthma for children aged 6-11. Evidence is still slowly evolving for children younger than 6 years.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19658,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Paediatric Respiratory Reviews\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Paediatric Respiratory Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prrv.2025.04.003\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Paediatric Respiratory Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prrv.2025.04.003","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
与青少年和成人相比,12岁以下儿童对未控制哮喘的治疗选择较少。长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)可作为成人哮喘的附加治疗,但在儿童中的证据尚不清楚。方法:我们系统地检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆的随机对照试验(rct)和观察性研究,这些研究评估了LAMA作为12岁以下哮喘儿童吸入皮质类固醇的附加治疗。我们对肺功能、哮喘控制和不良事件进行了随机效应荟萃分析。对不同剂量的LAMA进行亚组分析。结果:我们的系统综述纳入了4项随机对照试验和2项观察性研究(n = 1210)。肺功能测试显示,任何剂量的LAMA均可显著改善FEV1峰值(MD 86.16 mL;95% ci 18.62-153.71;结论:LAMA治疗6-11岁儿童中/重度哮喘安全有效。针对6岁以下儿童的证据仍在缓慢发展。
Long-acting muscarinic antagonists as add-on treatment for asthma in children under age 12: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Introduction: Children under 12 have fewer treatment options for uncontrolled asthma than adolescents and adults. Long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMA) can be used as an add-on therapy for asthma in adults, but the evidence in children is unclear.
Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated LAMA as an add-on therapy to inhaled corticosteroids in asthmatic children younger than 12. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis for lung function, asthma control, and adverse events. Subgroup analyses were performed for different LAMA dosages.
Results: Four RCTs and two observational studies (n = 1210) were included in our systematic review. The pulmonary function tests indicated that LAMA at any dose significantly improved peak FEV1 (MD 86.16 mL; 95 %CI 18.62-153.71; p < 0.01) and FEF25-75 % (MD 0.2518L; 95 %CI 0.1971-0.3064; p < 0.01), while FVC (MD 9.69 mL; 95 %CI -34.57 to 53.95; p = 0.67) remained unchanged. Asthma control measured by the Asthma Control Questionnaire (MD -0.07; 95 %CI -0.08 to -0.06; p < 0.01) also favoured LAMA treatments. Nighttime awakenings and rescue treatment usage showed no significant differences between groups. Using LAMA was also associated with fewer adverse events (RR 0.88; 95 %CI 0.79-0.98; p = 0.021).
Conclusion: LAMA are safe and effective for moderate/severe asthma for children aged 6-11. Evidence is still slowly evolving for children younger than 6 years.
期刊介绍:
Paediatric Respiratory Reviews offers authors the opportunity to submit their own editorials, educational reviews and short communications on topics relevant to paediatric respiratory medicine. These peer reviewed contributions will complement the commissioned reviews which will continue to form an integral part of the journal.
Subjects covered include:
• Epidemiology
• Immunology and cell biology
• Physiology
• Occupational disorders
• The role of allergens and pollutants
A particular emphasis is given to the recommendation of "best practice" for primary care physicians and paediatricians.
Paediatric Respiratory Reviews is aimed at general paediatricians but it should also be read by specialist paediatric physicians and nurses, respiratory physicians and general practitioners.
It is a journal for those who are busy and do not have time to read systematically through literature, but who need to stay up to date in the field of paediatric respiratory and sleep medicine.