scholarly journals Montelukast versus inhaled corticosteroids in the management of pediatric mild persistent asthma

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Scaparrotta ◽  
Sabrina Di Pillo ◽  
Marina Attanasi ◽  
Daniele Rapino ◽  
Anna Cingolani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Persistent Asthma ◽  
Jadad Score ◽  
First Line ◽  
Poor Growth ◽  
Asthmatic Children ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Pediatric Populations ◽  
Leukotriene Receptor ◽  
Mild Persistent Asthma

International guidelines recommend the use of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) as the preferred therapy, with leukotriene receptor antagonists (LTRAs) as an alternative, for the management of persistent asthma in children. Montelukast (MLK) is the first LTRA approved by the Food and Drug Administration for the use in young asthmatic children. Therefore, we performed an analysis of studies that compared the efficacy of MLK versus ICSs. We considered eligible for the inclusion randomized, controlled trials on pediatric populations with Jadad score>3, with at least 4 weeks of treatment with MLK compared with ICS. Although it is important to recognize that ICSs use is currently the recommended first-line treatment for asthmatic children, MLK can have consistent benefits in controlling asthmatic symptoms and may be an alternative in children unable to use ICSs or suffering from poor growth. On the contrary, low pulmonary function and/or high allergic inflammatory markers require the corticosteroid use.

Inhaled Budesonide vis-à-vis Inhaled Mometasone in Chinese Children with Mild Persistent Asthma: A Single-Center, Retrospective Study

Pharmacology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Pei Gao ◽  
Ying Ding ◽  
Bingru Yin ◽  
Haoxiang Gu
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Asthma Exacerbation ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Persistent Asthma ◽  
Forced Expiratory Volume ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Asthmatic Children ◽  
Technical Efficacy ◽  
Mild Persistent Asthma

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> A very limited option of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) is approved for pediatric use in China because in children the use of ICSs for long periods is associated with dose-dependent growth reduction. Due to the lack of consensus on which is the best ICS-based treatment option to manage mild persistent asthma in children, the present study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of budesonide (BUD)-based therapy vis-à-vis mometasone-based therapy in children with mild persistent asthma. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> A single-center, retrospective study was conducted in asthmatic children aged between 6 and 11 years. BUD and mometasone furoate (MF) were administered as per the approved dosing regimen using pressurized metered-dose inhalers via oral inhalation route for a period of 12 weeks. The study outcome was assessed in terms of the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV<sub>1</sub>), symptom scores, and nonoccurrence of side effects. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Among the 77 asthmatic children, 71 completed the study treatment and were used in carrying out the analysis. The improvement of spirometric parameters like FEV<sub>1</sub>, Tiffeneau-Pinelli index (FEV1/forced vital capacity [FVC]), and peak expiratory flow (PEF) values observed in the MF cohort was significantly greater than those of the BUD cohort (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.05 for all). An increase of approximately 12%/child was observed for FEV<sub>1</sub>/FVC ratios for the BUD cohort and MF cohorts. After the 12-week study, the PEF<sub>m</sub> and PEF<sub>e</sub> values increased to about 50 L/min/child for the BUD cohort and about 98 L/min/child for the MF cohort. During the study, no asthma exacerbation event was observed in the MF cohort, whereas 1 child in the BUD cohort had asthma exacerbation in week 4. The use of rescue medication during the study was required for 16.2 and 6% of children, respectively, for BUD and MF cohorts. Owing to low dosing frequency, MF could provide a better treatment approach than BUD due to improved patient compliance. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Although both drugs showed improvement in the quality of life of asthmatic children with manageable treatment-emergent adverse effects, the improvement was augmented in MF-treated children. <b><i>Level of Evidence:</i></b> The level of evidence was III. <b><i>Technical Efficacy Stage:</i></b> The technical efficacy stage was 4.

Montelukast versus Budesonide as a First Line Preventive Therapy in Mild Persistent Asthma in 2 to 18 y

2014 ◽  
Vol 81 (7) ◽  
pp. 655-659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monil Bharat Shah ◽  
Jayendra Gohil ◽  
Swati Khapekar ◽  
Jigna Dave
Keyword(s):  
Persistent Asthma ◽  
Preventive Therapy ◽  
First Line ◽  
Mild Persistent Asthma

scholarly journals Inhaled corticosteroids and leukotriene modifiers as mono-therapy for mild persistent asthma

2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-369
Author(s):  
Amr Radwan ◽  
Hoda Abd El-Aziz Salem ◽  
Mohamed E.A. Abdelrahim ◽  
Amgad A. Farhat ◽  
Ghada Atef Attia
Keyword(s):  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Persistent Asthma ◽  
Mild Persistent Asthma

scholarly journals Allergic Rhinitis during Pregnancy -an Update of Management

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-88
Author(s):  
Neyamat Ullah Khan ◽  
Kazi Shahnaz Begum
Keyword(s):  
Allergic Rhinitis ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
First Generation ◽  
Inhaled Corticosteroids ◽  
Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay ◽  
First Line ◽  
Correct Treatment ◽  
Nasal Symptoms ◽  
Leukotriene Receptor

The concurrence of allergic rhinitis and pregnancy is common. The diagnosis of allergic rhinitis is easily and reliably made, by eliciting the characteristic symptoms on history. This diagnosis is easily confirmed by using the radioallergosorbent test (RAST) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay(ELISA) tests. Nasal symptoms, particularly obstruction, are often aggravated in pregnancy, through several possible mechanisms. The disease is often pre-existing and sometimes coincidental during pregnancy, and can worsen, improve, or stay the same during pregnancy. Besides ameliorating the detrimental effects of AR on the patient's quality of life, correct treatment is important for controlling concomitant asthma. If possible, it is important to highlight the risks of not taking such medications at a pre-conception visit. Although most medications for AR readily cross the placenta, there are several choices of treatment for controlling the symptoms during pregnancy. The choices may be varied depending on the disease course and symptoms, and inhaled corticosteroids are considered to be the first-line medical treatment. In addition, either a first-generation antihistamine, such as chlorpheniramine, or a secondgeneration antihistamine, such as cetirizine or loratadine, can be prescribed as the second-line medical treatment. As an alternative, intranasal cromolyn can be prescribed safely. Some of the leukotriene receptor antagonists and nasal decongestant sprays can only be prescribed when other methods are no longer valid and strict benefits can be expected. It is considered safe to continue immunotherapy during pregnancy.Medicine Today 2016 Vol.28(2): 83-88

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document