Pem-Database.Org Editorial Comment on: “Efficacy of oral dexamethasone in outpatients with acute bronchiolitis” S Schuh, AL Coates, R Binnie, et al. J Pediatr 2002;140:27-32 David W. Johnson, Associate Professor, Departments of Pediatrics and Pharmacology & Therapeutics, University of Calgary, CANADA February 2002 Numerous clinical trials – somewhere in the neighborhood of 16 - have been published
which examine whether corticosteroids are effective in the treatment of bronchiolitis.
Until recently, the results of these trials - when examined individually - pointed strongly
towards a lack of benefit. However, the results of a recent meta-analysis of these trials
(Pediatrics 2000;105:e44) fly in the face of conventional wisdom, indicating that
corticosteroids reduce the duration of hospitalization by a modest amount – on average
Now Schuh et al. - in line with the findings of this meta-analysis - report that
corticosteroids reduce the rate of hospitalization in children with bronchiolitis by
approximately one half. In this trial, children less than two years of age with their first
episode of wheeze (approximately 50% were positive for RSV) who presented to an
emergency department with moderately severe respiratory distress were enrolled,
randomized, and treated orally with 1 mg/kg of dexamethasone or placebo. Treatment
with nebulized albuterol was standardized. Study investigators assessed clinical severity
hourly after treatment for four hours using a standardized and validated clinical score (the
Respiratory Assessment Change Score). Staff physicians, masked to treatment group and
assessment of clinical severity by study investigators, determined - based on their own
clinical judgement - whether or not the child was admitted or discharged home. These
investigators enrolled a total of 70 patients. Children treated with placebo improved less
(the mean clinical score improved by 3.2±3.7 points versus 5.0±3.1 points, p = 0.29), and were significantly more likely to be hospitalized (44% (15/34) versus 44% (7/36), p
= 0.039) than those children treated with dexamethasone. None of the 48 patients
discharged home were subsequently hospitalized.
Schuh’s results suggest significantly greater benefit for the use of corticosteroids than any
other trial reported to date. Why is that? We should start by asking in what ways Schuh’s
study design differs from previous studies. First, her study – to my knowledge – is the
first to have focused on change clinical outcomes in the emergency department, and its
impact on hospitalization rates. Virtually all studies have focused on outcomes over the
course of several days, and, in some cases, up to months later. Second, the dose of
corticosteroids administered was substantially larger (1 mg/kg of dexamethasone, the
equivalent of approximately 7 mg/kg of prednisone) than most studies administered. And
last, they enrolled patients fairly early in the course of their disease (on average slightly
Do the differences in study design outlined above make a logical case for why Schuh
found such a striking difference, whereas previous investigators did not? Its possible but,
in my opinion, not likely. Our experience in the treatment of asthma and croup suggests
that demonstrable clinical benefit occurs as early as three to five hours after treatment.
But it seems counter-intuitive that if corticosteroids yield such a striking benefit within a
matter of hours, that it would attenuate so sharply over the following days. Regarding the
dose of corticosteroid used, Roosevelt et al (Lancet 1996;348:292) also used a dose of 1
mg/kg/day of dexamethasone, but found no benefit. Furthermore, several studies in adults
and children with asthma have not shown supratherapeutic dosing of corticosteroids to be
more effective than doses in the range of 1 to 2 mg/kg/day prednsione (0.15-0.30
mg/kg/day dexamethasone). And last, though almost all published studies have focused
on hospitalized children, as opposed to those evaluated in an emergency department,
several studies have enrolled children at a comparable stage in their disease. For example,
Klassen et al. enrolled patients who had had symptoms, on average, for slightly less than
72 hours (J Pediatr 1997:130:191), in contrast to Schuh whose patients had been
symptomatic for slightly less than 48 hours.
Schuh’s study was well-designed and reported, but – because it involved only a single
center – was relatively small. Given the striking difference between Schuh’s results, and
the previous literature, I think it is critical that a large multicenter randomized controlled
trial be completed with a similar study design similar before we accept that steroids are
Estudo de Caso 03 Avaliação de projetos internacionais à luz da regulamentação brasileira para a pesquisa envolvendo seres humanos Um estudo multicêntrico, internacional, aleatório, para comparar o desempenho de dois modelos de implantes contraceptivos para mulheres foi submetido a um comitê de ética no Brasil. O estudo será realizado simultaneamente em 10 países em dese
Unauthorized Acts in Declaratory Judgment tory relief based on statements or acts The Supreme Court rejected the Federal not authorized by the patentee may Circuit’s “reasonable apprehension of be dismissed for lack of subject matter suit” test, and held that the requirements jurisdiction, and post-filing events may of a case or controversy are met where not cure the jurisdictional defect o