|
|
||||||||
Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password |
|||||||||
* From the Departments of Respiratory Medicine and Clinical Allergology (Drs. Kiljander, Salomaa, and Terho) and Clinical Physiology (Dr. Hietanen), Turku University Central Hospital, Finland.
Correspondence to: Toni Kiljander, MD, Department of Respiratory Medicine and Clinical Allergology, Turku University Central Hospital, Alvar Aallon tie 275, 21540 Preitil
, Finland; e-mail: toni.kiljander{at}utu.fi
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Design: A double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study.
Setting: Asthmatic patients who attended the pulmonary outpatient clinic of Turku University Central Hospital, Finland.
Patients: One hundred seven asthmatic patients.
Interventions: The patients who were found to have GER in ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring were randomized to receive either omeprazole, 40 mg qd, or placebo for 8 weeks. After a 2-week washout period, the patients were crossed over to the other treatment. Spirometry was performed at baseline and immediately after both treatment periods. Peak expiratory values, use of sympathomimetics, and pulmonary and gastric symptoms were recorded daily in a diary.
Results: Pathologic GER was found in 53% of the asthmatic patients. One third of these patients had no typical reflux symptoms. Daytime pulmonary symptoms did not improve significantly (p = 0.14), but a reduction in nighttime asthma symptoms (p = 0.04) was found during omeprazole treatment. In the patients with intrinsic asthma, there was an improvement in FEV1 values (p = 0.049). Based on symptom scores, 35% of the patients were regarded as responders to 8-week omeprazole treatment. The reflux (time [percent] of pH < 4) was found to be more severe (p = 0.002) in the responders.
Conclusions: There is a high prevalence of GER in the asthmatic population. This reflux is often clinically "silent." After an 8-week omeprazole treatment, there was a reduction in nocturnal asthma symptoms, whereas daytime asthma outcome did not improve. There seems to be a subgroup of asthma patients who benefit from excessive antireflux therapy.
Key Words: asthma gastroesophageal reflux omeprazole
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
It has been shown that after antireflux therapy is started, a duration of up to 2 to 3 months is required before asthma symptoms are relieved.13 15 Harding et al15 have shown that 27% of GER patients require > 20 mg of omeprazole to stop acidic reflux. Most studies so far have not met all of the following criteria (which the present study did): adequate antireflux therapy, a treatment period of sufficient duration, and placebo control.
The objectives of the present study are as follows: (1) to investigate the prevalence of GER in the outpatient asthmatic population, and (2) to determine the effect of omeprazole on asthma symptoms and pulmonary function.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
20% diurnal variation in peak
expiratory flow (PEF) values. Asthma was considered to be extrinsic if
at least one positive reaction was found in skin prick tests with
common allergens. One hundred seven asthmatic patients from the
pulmonary outpatient department of the Turku University Central
Hospital participated in the study. Thirty-five of the patients (33%)
were male and 72 (67%) were female. The mean age was 49 years old
(range, 21 to 76). The results of the skin prick tests were
positive in 43 patients (40%), negative in 44 patients (41%), and not
available in 20 patients (19%). Twenty of the patients (19%)
were smokers.
Study Design
Ambulatory esophageal pH monitoring was performed on all 107
patients. The patients whose pH recordings were abnormal were
randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive either omeprazole, 40
mg qd, or placebo for 8 weeks. The patients were advised to take the
study medication just before breakfast. After a 2-week washout period,
the patients were crossed over to the other treatment for 8 weeks.
Treatment was preceded by a 1-week pretreatment phase, during which the
baseline data were collected. Drugs were provided by Astra Finland
(Masala, Finland), who was also responsible for randomization.
Compliance with the trial medication was measured by tablet counts
after both treatment periods. An attempt was made to maintain asthma
medication unchanged, but in case of a deterioration of asthma,
attending physicians were allowed to change medication when required.
Oral steroid courses that were needed were counted.
All treated patients underwent flow-volume spirometry before the first treatment period and immediately after both treatment periods. PEF values, the use of sympathomimetics, and the following variables were recorded daily in a diary: cough, dyspnea, wheezing, heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain, and nighttime asthma symptoms. A scoring system used previously13 15 was utilized: symptoms were recorded on a scale of 0 (no symptoms) to 3 (severe symptoms). Afterwards, the weekly pulmonary (cough, dyspnea, wheezing) and gastric (heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain) symptom scores (both 0 to 63) and nighttime asthma symptom score (0 to 21) were calculated by summing the daily scores.
The patients were considered to be free of typical GER symptoms if they had heartburn, regurgitation, chest pain, and dysphagia less than once a week.
The patients were regarded as responders to the antireflux therapy if
their pulmonary symptom score or PEF or FEV1
values improved on omeprazole from the baseline, and if the improvement
was
20% when compared to placebo therapy.15
18
The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Turku University Central Hospital, and every patient gave written informed consent.
Ambulatory pH Monitoring
pH recordings were made using semidisposable monocrystant
antimony pH catheters (Synectics Medical; Stockholm, Sweden)
that have two channels for pH monitoring and a built-in water-perfused
channel for manometric identification of the lower esophageal sphincter
(LES). pH electrodes, which were 15 cm apart, were calibrated before
each procedure.
A pH probe was passed transnasally into the stomach and then slowly withdrawn, and a distal pH electrode was positioned 5 cm above the LES, as determined by the change in pH between the stomach and the esophagus.25 In 78 patients (73%), the LES location was also checked manometrically by using the slow-pull-through technique. An external reference electrode was attached to the skin of the chest wall. pH was monitored 5 and 20 cm above the LES, and was stored at 4 s intervals using a portable recorder (Digitrapper Mk III; Synectics Medical). The parameters measured were those described by Johnson and DeMeester.26 After ambulatory recording, the data was downloaded into an IBM-compatible computer using appropriate analysis software (EsopHogram; Gastrosoft; Irving, Tx). pH monitoring was considered to be abnormal if total time pH < 4 was > 4.5% or if the DeMeester score was > 14.7.27
During pH monitoring, the patients carried on their normal daily routines. They were instructed to keep a diary, noting respiratory and gastric symptoms, meals, and recumbent times. All patients were asked to stop possible antacid, H2-blocker, prokinetic, or proton pump inhibitor medications at least 3 days before pH monitoring, and they were also told to avoid these drugs during the monitoring.
Pulmonary Function Tests
Patients were advised to measure their PEF values (Spira Peak
Flowmeter; Spira; Helsinki, Finland) three times every morning
within an hour after awakening, and to write the best result down in a
diary. All spirometric measurements were made using Flowscreen
spirometry (Jaeger GmbH; Würzburg, Germany) that was
calibrated according to instructions before each procedure. The normal
values used were made especially for the Finnish
population.28
Statistical Analysis
The statistical analysis was performed using methodology
developed for crossover design with two periods and two
treatments.29
When comparing diary information, the
average scores for the 3 last weeks at the end of both treatment
periods were used. Because the outcome variables were discrete and/or
not normally distributed, the analyses were conducted with a
nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test using appropriate
statistical software (SAS Release 6.12; SAS Institute; Cary, NC). When
mentioned, the
2 test was utilized. Before
testing the treatment effect, carryover effect was tested using 0.10 as
a level of significance.30
In other tests, p values
< 0.05 were interpreted as statistically significant.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
No carryover effect was detected after the washout period. The
variables that were followed and their p values are shown in Table 2
. There was a significant improvement in the gastric symptom score with
omeprazole treatment compared to placebo treatment (p = 0.0001).
Also, the pulmonary symptom score improved (Fig 1
, 2
), but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.14). There was a
small but statistically significant relief in nighttime asthma symptoms
(p = 0.04). Pulmonary function did not improve; on the contrary,
there was a statistically significant decline in
FEV1 values. With 95% confidence, this decline
was
0.15 L. Seven oral steroid courses were used during omeprazole
treatment, nine were used during placebo treatment, and two were used
during the washout period.
|
|
20% while receiving omeprazole, and they were thus regarded as
responders. No PEF or FEV1 responders were found.
The pulmonary symptom scores of the responders and the nonresponders
are shown in Figure 3
. Reflux (time [percent] pH < 4) was more severe (p = 0.002) in
the patients who responded to the omeprazole therapy than in the
patients who did not respond (Fig 4
).
|
|
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Although theophylline has been shown to reduce the pressure of the LES and thus potentially promote GER,32 it has been shown that the influence of theophylline or other asthma medication on the prevalence of GER in asthmatic patients is minor.2 We did not find any difference in the use of any asthma medication between patients with or without GER.
Our study showed some improvement in asthma symptoms after 8-week omeprazole treatment; however, the improvement was not statistically significant. This is in accordance with several studies with H2 blockers and proton pump inhibitors,19 21 22 23 which have failed to significantly reduce asthma symptoms in asthmatic patients with GER. On the other hand, Harper et al,13 who studied 15 nonallergic asthma patients with symptomatic GER, were able to achieve a statistically significant improvement in daytime asthma symptoms after 8-week ranitidine therapy. Unfortunately, their study was not placebo controlled. Similarly to Harper et al,13 we were also able to show a statistically significant improvement in the pulmonary function of patients with intrinsic asthma after 2 months of omeprazole treatment. In another study with nonallergic asthmatic patients, both medical (cimetidine) and surgical antireflux therapy were found to be significantly more effective in reducing asthma symptoms than placebo therapy. In this study, pulmonary function did not improve significantly after antireflux therapy.14
Recently Levin et al,33
who studied nine asthmatic
patients with symptomatic GER, have shown that omeprazole, 20 mg qd for
8 weeks, significantly improves PEF values and quality of life when
compared to placebo therapy. Furthermore, two groups15
18
have shown that some asthmatic patients with GER respond to omeprazole
therapy. Meier et al18
administered omeprazole, 20 mg bid
for 6 weeks, to 15 asthmatic patients with esophagitis and symptoms of
pyrosis in a placebo-controlled crossover study. They found an
improvement of
20% in FEV1 in four patients
(27%). All responders and only 6 of 11 nonresponders had a complete
healing of esophagitis. This has raised a discussion as to whether they
would have been able to get more responders with longer treatment.
Harding et al15
studied 30 asthmatic patients with
symptomatic GER. They found that 20 patients (67%) responded to 3
months of omeprazole treatment with
20% decrease in asthmatic
symptoms and 6 patients (20%) responded with
20% increase in PEF
values.
Unlike Meier et al18 and Harding et al,15 we did not reach a 20% increase in FEV1 or PEF values with any of the patients; unlike Levin et al,33 we were not able to show a significant improvement in daytime asthma symptoms after 2 months of omeprazole treatment. There are at least two possible explanations. Firstly, we feel that our patients asthma was in good control already at the baseline (all but three patients used regular inhaled steroids, and the mean FEV1 was 81% of predicted), and thus it was difficult to reach a 20% increase in the pulmonary function or a statistically significant improvement in the asthma symptoms. Secondly, in the present study, we have shown that GER is relatively severe in the asthmatic patients who respond to omeprazole treatment. Since our inclusion criteria did not include the presence of typical reflux symptoms, it is probable that reflux in our patients was milder and the prevalence of esophagitis was probably lower than in the previous studies 15 18 33 .
We found 18 patients (35%) to be asthma symptom responders to 2 months of omeprazole treatment. Our finding is less than 67% what Harding et al found.15 This could be due to the fact that their study was not placebo controlled, whereas the present study was. Although it has been shown that even mild GER without esophagitis is sufficient to cause pulmonary symptoms,14 we found GER to be more severe in patients whose pulmonary symptoms were relieved with the omeprazole treatment than in patients whose pulmonary symptoms did not improve with omeprazole (Fig 4) . Of interest is that even those patients who were regarded as responders showed improvement in their pulmonary symptoms only after several weeks of omeprazole treatment (Fig 3) . This is in accordance with previous studies13 15 that have shown that asthma symptom improvement lags behind the typical reflux symptom improvement.
An interesting study was made by Ekström and Tibbling.34 They studied 37 patients with nocturnal asthma and found significantly lower morning PEF values in those patients who had pathologic nocturnal GER compared to patients with no GER at night, suggesting a relationship between GER and nocturnal asthma. Similarly to our study, some previously published placebo-controlled studies with H2 blockers have been able to show an amelioration in nighttime asthma symptoms.12 16 17 Conversely, Ford et al22 were not able to show a significant improvement in patients with nocturnal asthma and GER after omeprazole treatment. There may be several explanations for this: they studied only 11 patients, the length of treatment was only 4 weeks, and the dose of omeprazole was perhaps not sufficient (20 mg). A retrospective study of a surgical treatment of GER in asthmatic patients also showed a marked relief in asthma symptoms in patients with intrinsic asthma having a predominance of nocturnal symptoms.35 There is evidence that especially asthmatic patients with excessive proximal esophageal reflux might benefit from antireflux therapy,15 36 although contradictory reports have been published.37
In conclusion, there is a high prevalence of GER in the asthmatic population. This reflux is often clinically "silent." In this study, we have shown that daytime asthma outcome did not improve with 8-week omeprazole therapy. However, there seems to be a subgroup of asthmatic patients who benefit from excessive antireflux therapy. These responders seem to have relatively severe reflux, and they possibly are patients with intrinsic asthma having predominantly nighttime asthmatic symptoms.
|
| Footnotes |
|---|
Abbreviations: GER = gastroesophageal reflux; LES = lower esophageal sphincter; PEF = peak expiratory flow
This study was supported by the Finnish Anti-Tuberculosis Association Foundation, the Väinö and Laina Kivi Foundation, and the Research Foundation of Respiratory Diseases.
Received for publication January 5, 1999. Accepted for publication May 25, 1999.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
T. O. Kiljander, S. M. Harding, S. K. Field, M. R. Stein, H. S. Nelson, J. Ekelund, M. Illueca, O. Beckman, and M. B. Sostek Effects of Esomeprazole 40 mg Twice Daily on Asthma: A Randomized Placebo-controlled Trial Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., May 15, 2006; 173(10): 1091 - 1097. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. R. Littner, F. W. Leung, E. D. Ballard II, B. Huang, N. K. Samra, and on behalf of the Lansoprazole Asthma Study Group Effects of 24 Weeks of Lansoprazole Therapy on Asthma Symptoms, Exacerbations, Quality of Life, and Pulmonary Function in Adult Asthmatic Patients With Acid Reflux Symptoms Chest, September 1, 2005; 128(3): 1128 - 1135. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Fass, S. F. Quan, G. T. O'Connor, A. Ervin, and C. Iber Predictors of Heartburn During Sleep in a Large Prospective Cohort Study Chest, May 1, 2005; 127(5): 1658 - 1666. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Jain Proton-Pump Inhibitor Therapy for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Does It Treat the Asthma? Chest, April 1, 2005; 127(4): 1097 - 1098. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J L Mathew, M Singh, and S K Mittal Gastro-oesophageal reflux and bronchial asthma: current status and future directions Postgrad. Med. J., December 1, 2004; 80(950): 701 - 705. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. O. Kiljander and J. O. Laitinen The Prevalence of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Adult Asthmatics Chest, November 1, 2004; 126(5): 1490 - 1494. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C F Everett, J A Kastelik, S A Mulrennan, A H Morice, L Heaney, and B Johnston Predictors of therapy resistant asthma * Authors' reply Thorax, March 1, 2004; 59(3): 270 - 271. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. E. Richter Not the Perfect Study, but Helpful Wisdom for Treating Asthma Patients With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Chest, April 1, 2003; 123(4): 973 - 975. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Khoshoo, T. Le, R. M. Haydel Jr, L. Landry, and C. Nelson Role of Gastroesophageal Reflux in Older Children With Persistent Asthma Chest, April 1, 2003; 123(4): 1008 - 1013. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Zerbib, O. Guisset, H. Lamouliatte, A. Quinton, J. P. Galmiche, and J. M. Tunon-de-Lara Effects of Bronchial Obstruction on Lower Esophageal Sphincter Motility and Gastroesophageal Reflux in Patients with Asthma Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., November 1, 2002; 166(9): 1206 - 1211. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S K FIELD, L R SUTHERLAND, and P GIBSON Gastro-oesophageal reflux and asthma Thorax, November 1, 2001; 56(11): 898 - 898. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J L Coughlan, P G Gibson, and R L Henry Medical treatment for reflux oesophagitis does not consistently improve asthma control: a systematic review Thorax, March 1, 2001; 56(3): 198 - 204. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
![]() |
S. M. HARDING, M. R. GUZZO, and J. E. RICHTER The Prevalence of Gastroesophageal Reflux in Asthma Patients without Reflux Symptoms Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., July 1, 2000; 162(1): 34 - 39. [Abstract] [Full Text] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |