Lung transplantation for COPD - evidence-based?

Lung transplantation has now been performed for more than 30 years in patients with end-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). This disease is the major indication for lung transplantation, involving more than one third of the procedures worldwide. Although lung transplantation in COPD patients has clearly shown a positive impact on lung function, exercise capacity and quality of life, the survival benefit remains difficult to ascertain. Several methodological difficulties, particularly the absence of classical randomised studies, make the analysis especially challenging. There is however indirect but convincing evidence that lung transplantation can, when appropriate selection criteria are applied, provide not only an active post-transplant lifestyle but also a survival benefit for patients with COPD.

Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: A possible strategy for increasing smoking cessation rates could be to provide smokers who have contact with healthcare systems with feedback on the biomedical or potential future effects of smoking, e.g. measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), lung function, or genetic susceptibility to lung cancer. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of biomedical risk assessment provided in addition to various levels of counselling, as a contributing aid to smoking cessation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We systematically searched the Cochrane Collaboration Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2008 Issue 4, MEDLINE (1966 to January 2009), and EMBASE (1980 to January 2009). We combined methodological terms with terms related to smoking cessation counselling and biomedical measurements. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were: a randomized controlled trial design; subjects participating in smoking cessation interventions; interventions based on a biomedical test to increase motivation to quit; control groups receiving all other components of intervention; an outcome of smoking cessation rate at least six months after the start of the intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two assessors independently conducted data extraction on each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus. Results were expressed as a relative risk (RR) for smoking cessation with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where appropriate a pooled effect was estimated using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect method. MAIN RESULTS: We included eleven trials using a variety of biomedical tests. Two pairs of trials had sufficiently similar recruitment, setting and interventions to calculate a pooled effect; there was no evidence that CO measurement in primary care (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.32) or spirometry in primary care (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.81) increased cessation rates. We did not pool the other seven trials. One trial in primary care detected a significant benefit of lung age feedback after spirometry (RR 2.12; 95% CI 1.24 to 3.62). One trial that used ultrasonography of carotid and femoral arteries and photographs of plaques detected a benefit (RR 2.77; 95% CI 1.04 to 7.41) but enrolled a population of light smokers. Five trials failed to detect evidence of a significant effect. One of these tested CO feedback alone and CO + genetic susceptibility as two different intervention; none of the three possible comparisons detected significant effects. Three others used a combination of CO and spirometry feedback in different settings, and one tested for a genetic marker. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is little evidence about the effects of most types of biomedical tests for risk assessment. Spirometry combined with an interpretation of the results in terms of 'lung age' had a significant effect in a single good quality trial. Mixed quality evidence does not support the hypothesis that other types of biomedical risk assessment increase smoking cessation in comparison to standard treatment. Only two pairs of studies were similar enough in term of recruitment, setting, and intervention to allow meta-analysis.

Associations of short-term particle and noise exposures with markers of cardiovascular and respiratory health among highway maintenance workers

BACKGROUND: Highway maintenance workers are constantly and simultaneously exposed to traffic-related particle and noise emissions, and both have been linked to increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in population-based epidemiology studies. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to investigate short-term health effects related to particle and noise exposure. METHODS: We monitored 18 maintenance workers, during as many as five 24-hour periods from a total of 50 observation days. We measured their exposure to fine particulate matter (PM2.5), ultrafine particles, noise, and the cardiopulmonary health endpoints: blood pressure, pro-inflammatory and pro-thrombotic markers in the blood, lung function and fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FeNO) measured approximately 15 hours post-work. Heart rate variability was assessed during a sleep period approximately 10 hours post-work. RESULTS: PM2.5 exposure was significantly associated with C-reactive protein and serum amyloid A, and negatively associated with tumor necrosis factor α. None of the particle metrics were significantly associated with von Willebrand factor or tissue factor expression. PM2.5 and work noise were associated with markers of increased heart rate variability, and with increased HF and LF power. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure on the following morning were significantly associated with noise exposure after work, and non-significantly associated with PM2.5. We observed no significant associations between any of the exposures and lung function or FeNO. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that exposure to particles and noise during highway maintenance work might pose a cardiovascular health risk. Actions to reduce these exposures could lead to better health for this population of workers.

Biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation.

BACKGROUND: A possible strategy for increasing smoking cessation rates could be to provide smokers who have contact with healthcare systems with feedback on the biomedical or potential future effects of smoking, e.g. measurement of exhaled carbon monoxide (CO), lung function, or genetic susceptibility to lung cancer. We reviewed systematically data on smoking cessation rates from controlled trials that used biomedical risk assessment and feedback. OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy of biomedical risk assessment provided in addition to various levels of counselling, as a contributing aid to smoking cessation. SEARCH STRATEGY: We systematically searched he Cochrane Collaboration Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1966 to 2004), and EMBASE (1980 to 2004). We combined methodological terms with terms related to smoking cessation counselling and biomedical measurements. SELECTION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were: a randomized controlled trial design; subjects participating in smoking cessation interventions; interventions based on a biomedical test to increase motivation to quit; control groups receiving all other components of intervention; an outcome of smoking cessation rate at least six months after the start of the intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two assessors independently conducted data extraction on each paper, with disagreements resolved by consensus. MAIN RESULTS: From 4049 retrieved references, we selected 170 for full text assessment. We retained eight trials for data extraction and analysis. One of the eight used CO alone and CO + Genetic Susceptibility as two different intervention groups, giving rise to three possible comparisons. Three of the trials isolated the effect of exhaled CO on smoking cessation rates resulting in the following odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI): 0.73 (0.38 to 1.39), 0.93 (0.62 to 1.41), and 1.18 (0.84 to 1.64). Combining CO measurement with genetic susceptibility gave an OR of 0.58 (0.29 to 1.19). Exhaled CO measurement and spirometry were used together in three trials, resulting in the following ORs (95% CI): 0.6 (0.25 to 1.46), 2.45 (0.73 to 8.25), and 3.50 (0.88 to 13.92). Spirometry results alone were used in one other trial with an OR of 1.21 (0.60 to 2.42).Two trials used other motivational feedback measures, with an OR of 0.80 (0.39 to 1.65) for genetic susceptibility to lung cancer alone, and 3.15 (1.06 to 9.31) for ultrasonography of carotid and femoral arteries performed in light smokers (average 10 to 12 cigarettes a day). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to the scarcity of evidence of sufficient quality, we can make no definitive statements about the effectiveness of biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation. Current evidence of lower quality does not however support the hypothesis that biomedical risk assessment increases smoking cessation in comparison with standard treatment. Only two studies were similar enough in term of recruitment, setting, and intervention to allow pooling of data and meta-analysis.

The epidthelial sodium channel ENaC and its regulators in the epidermal permeability barrier function

The highly amiloride-sensitive epithelial sodium channel ENaC is well known to be involved in controlling whole body sodium homeostasis and lung liquid clearance. ENaC expression has also been detected in the skin of amphibians and mammals. Mice lacking ENaC expression lose rapidly weight associated with an epidermal barrier defect that develops following birth. This dehydration is accompanied with a highly abnormal lipid matrix composition and an impaired skin surface acidification. This strongly suggests a role of ENaC in the maturation of barrier function rather than in the prenatal generation of the barrier, and may be as such an important modulator for skin hydration. In parallel, gene targeting experiments of regulators of ENaC activity, membrane serine proteases, also termed channel activating proteases, like CAP1/Prss8 and matriptase/MT-SP1 by themselves have been shown to be crucial for the epidermal barrier function. In our review, we mainly focus on the role of ENaC and its regulators in the skin and discuss their importance in the epidermal permeability barrier function.