Efficacy and side effects of intravenous theophylline in acute asthma: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors Mahemuti G, Zhang H, Li J, Tieliwaerdi N, Ren L
Received 8 November 2017
Accepted for publication 5 December 2017
Published 10 January 2018 Volume 2018:12 Pages 99—120
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Qiongyu Guo
Gulixian Mahemuti, Hui Zhang, Jing Li, Nueramina Tieliwaerdi, Lili Ren
Respiratory Department, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi, Xinjiang Province, People’s Republic of China
Background and objective: Theophylline has been used for decades to treat both acute and chronic asthma. Despite its longevity in the practitioner’s formulary, no detailed meta-analysis has been performed to determine the conditions, including concomitant medications, under which theophylline should be used for acute exacerbations of asthma. We aimed to quantify the usefulness and side effects of theophylline with or without ethylene diamine (aminophylline) in acute asthma, with particular emphasis on patient subgroups, such as children, adults, and concomitant medications.
Methods: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry for randomized, controlled clinical trials. We planned a priori subgroup analyses by time post-medication, concomitant medication, control type, and age.
Results: We included 52 study arms from 42 individual trials. Of these, 29 study arms included an active control, such as adrenaline, beta-2 agonists, or leukotriene receptor antagonists, and 23 study arms compared theophylline (with or without ethylene diamine) with placebo or no drug. Theophylline significantly reduced heart rate when compared with active control (p=0.01) and overall duration of stay (p=0.002), but beta-2 agonists were superior to theophylline at improving forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (p=0.002). Theophylline was not significantly different from other drugs in its effects on respiratory rate, forced vital capacity (FVC), peak expiratory flow rate, admission rate, use of rescue medication, oxygen saturation, or symptom score. Closer examination of the data revealed that the medications given in addition to theophylline or control significantly changed the effectiveness of theophylline (subgroup difference: p<0.00001).
Conclusion: Given the low cost of theophylline, and its similar efficacy and rate of side effects compared with other drugs, we suggest that theophylline, when given with bronchodilators with or without steroids, is a cost-effective and safe choice for acute asthma exacerbations.
Keywords: theophylline, theophylline with ethylene diamine, aminophylline, asthma, bronchodilators, beta-2 agonists, adrenaline, FEV, PEFR, affordable drugs
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]