Asthma and mode of birth delivery: A study in 5-year-old Dutch twins.

Several studies report caesarean section (CS) to be a risk factor for childhood asthma. We used data from a large cohort of 5-year-old twins to examine the relationship between mode of birth delivery and asthma. The extent to which an infant is exposed to maternal vaginal flora may protect against the risk of developing asthma. Therefore, we expect a lower rate of asthma in twins born by vaginal delivery (VD) than those born by CS, and a lower rate of asthma in first-born twins compared to second-born twins by VD. Information on mode of delivery was obtained at the time of birth in a survey completed by the mother shortly after delivery. Information on history of asthma diagnosis by a physician was obtained by parental report when the twins were 5 years old. Complete data were available for 6330 first-born and 5438 second-born twins from birth cohorts 1991-2000. Full term first-born twins born by CS had a significantly higher risk of asthma compared to those born by VD, odds ratio = 1.59 (95% CI = 1.23-2.06). No significant differences were observed between CS and VD first-born twins when gestational age was less than 37 weeks, and no significant differences were observed between CS and VD second-born twins at any gestational age. No differences in asthma prevalence were found between first- and second-born twins both born by VD. CS may increase the risk of asthma to full term infants, however, the underlying mechanism is unclear

Use of fractional exhaled nitric oxide to guide the treatment of asthma an official american thoracic society clinical practice guideline

Background: The fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) test is a point-of-care test that is used in the assessment of asthma.Objective: To provide evidence-based clinical guidance on whether FENO testing is indicated to optimize asthma treatment in patients with asthma in whom treatment is being considered.Methods: An international, multidisciplinary panel of experts was convened to form a consensus document regarding a single question relevant to the use of FENO. The question was selected from three potential questions based on the greatest perceived impact on clinical practice and the unmet need for evidencebased answers related to this question. The panel performed systematic reviews of published randomized controlled trials between 2004 and 2019 and followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence-to-decision framework to develop recommendations. All panel members evaluated and approved the recommendations.Main Results: After considering the overall low quality of the evidence, the panel made a conditional recommendation for FENO-based care. In patients with asthma in whom treatment is being considered, we suggest that FENO is beneficial and should be used in addition to usual care. This judgment is based on a balance of effects that probably favors the intervention; the moderate costs and availability of resources, which probably favors the intervention; and the perceived acceptability and feasibility of the intervention in daily practice.Conclusions: Clinicians should consider this recommendation to measure FENO in patients with asthma in whom treatment is being considered based on current best available evidence. </p

Official American thoracic society clinical practice guidelines: Diagnostic evaluation of infants with recurrent or persistent wheezing

Background: Infantile wheezing is a common problem, but there are no guidelines for the evaluation of infants with recurrent or persistent wheezing that is not relieved or prevented by standard therapies. Methods: An American Thoracic Society-sanctioned guideline development committee selected clinical questions related to uncertainties or controversies in the diagnostic evaluation of wheezing infants. Members of the committee conducted pragmatic evidence syntheses, which followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The evidence syntheses were used to inform the formulation and grading of recommendations. Results: The pragmatic evidence syntheses identified few studies that addressed the clinical questions. The studies that were identified constituted very low-quality evidence, consisting almost exclusively of case series with risk of selection bias, indirect patient populations, and imprecise estimates. The committee made conditional recommendations to perform bronchoscopic airway survey, bronchoalveolarlavage,esophagealpHmonitoring,andaswallowing study.Italsomadeconditionalrecommendationsagainstempiricfood avoidance, upper gastrointestinal radiography, and gastrointestinal scintigraphy. Finally, the committee recommended additional research about the roles ofinfantpulmonaryfunction testingand food avoidance or dietary changes, based on allergy testing. Conclusions: Although infantile wheezing is common, there is a paucity of evidence to guide clinicians in selecting diagnostic tests for recurrent or persistent wheezing. Our committee made several conditional recommendations to guide clinicians; however, additional research that measures clinical outcomes is needed to improve our confidence in the effects of various diagnostic interventions and to allow advice to be provided with greater confidence

An official American thoracic society research statement: Current challenges facing research and therapeutic advances in airway remodeling

© Copyright 2017 by the American Thoracic Society. Background: Airway remodeling (AR) is a prominent feature of asthma and other obstructive lung diseases that is minimally affected by current treatments. The goals of this Official American Thoracic Society (ATS) Research Statement are to discuss the scientific, technological, economic, and regulatory issues that deter progress of AR research and development of therapeutics targeting AR and to propose approaches and solutions to these specific problems. This Statement is not intended to provide clinical practice recommendations on any disease in which AR is observed and/or plays a role. Methods: An international multidisciplinary group from within academia, industry, and the National Institutes of Health, with expertise in multimodal approaches to the study of airway structure and function, pulmonary research and clinical practice in obstructive lung disease, and drug discovery platforms was invited to participate in one internet-based and one face-to-face meeting to address the above-stated goals. Although the majority of the analysis related to AR was in asthma, AR in other diseases was also discussed and considered in the recommendations. A literature search of PubMed was performed to support conclusions. The search was not a systematic review of the evidence. Results: Multiple conceptual, logistical, economic, and regulatory deterrents were identified that limit the performance of AR research and impede accelerated, intensive development of AR-focused therapeutics. Complementary solutions that leverage expertise of academia and industry were proposed to address them. Conclusions: To date, numerous factors related to the intrinsic difficulty in performing AR research, and economic forces that are disincentives for the pursuit of AR treatments, have thwarted the ability to understandARpathology and mechanisms and to address it clinically. This ATS Research Statement identifies potential solutions for each of these factors and emphasizes the importance of educating the global research community as to the extent of the problem as a critical first step in developing effective strategies for: (1) increasing the extent and impact of AR research and (2) developing, testing, and ultimately improving drugs targeting AR