EVOLUTION
IN ASTHMA — |
Dr. Victor N. Solopov
«Asthma Service», Medical Services Ltd., Moscow
KEY WORDS
Asthma evolution. Fenoterol. Epinephrine. Sudden death from asthma
ABSTRACT
The different types of bronchial response to fenoterol
(Fen) and epinephrine (Epi) resulted after their consecutive inhalation and interaction in
patients' airways depending on the evolution in asthma were studied in 396 subjects. 278
females and 118 males aged 16-69 years were examined. The examination program consisted of
the pulmonary function (PF) investigation, pharmacological testing using Fen, Epi, as well
as evaluation of the illness duration (Till) and the reversibility of bronchial
obstruction (RBO).
The PF investigation and pharmacological testing were carried out according to the
following scheme:
RBO = FEV1ini + ReFEV1fen + ReFEV1epi |
where:
FEV1ini = initial forced expiratory volume per the 1st sec; | ReFEV1fen = response to Fen; | ReFEV1epi = response to Epi |
Till was determined as a length of the period from the
appearance of the first asthmatic symptoms: persistent cough, dyspnea, wheezing and
breathlessness up to moment of the patient's investigation and was confirmed more
precisely by the clinical records data.
It was found that interaction of Fen and Epi seems to be a naturally determined process
manifesting by the appearance of consecutive «waves» of epinephrine-induced
bronchodilation and bronchoconstriction. Epinephrine-induced bronchoconstriction against
the background fenoterol inhalation appears in spite of a long term steroid treatment. The
severity of alpha-induced bronchoconstriction depends on the evolution in asthma and it
seems to be one of the causes of asthmatics sudden death.
INTRODUCTION
As it is known, the main pathogenetic syndrome determining
all the clinical symptoms of bronchial asthma (cough, dyspnea, wheezing and
breathlessness) is the airflow obstruction. And so far as chronic airflow obstruction is
to be prevented, physicians require a knowledge of the evolution in asthma, especially in
relation to new medication strategies. In spite of the fact that subjective state of
patients does not always correlate with the manifestation of bronchial obstruction [1],
its progression determines finally the prognosis of the disease since it results in
irreversible obstruction [2], which resists the majority of antiasthmatic drugs. As a
result an increase of asthmatic mortality was noted [3], as well as of cases of sudden
death of patients [4], whose subjective and objective status was rather reliable.
What is the veritable cause of fatal cases in one asthmatic population and of
«longevity» in another and why does, despite a wide use of refined antiasthmatic drugs,
the disease take an irrepressible course and what is the actual cause of this phenomenon?
Probably, the cause seems to be in the fact, that every stage of evolution of the disease
has its own peculiarities based on the different response to the bronchodilating drugs
presented by beta-2-agonists and their interaction in patients’ organism with their own
epinephrine. With this in mind we decided to study the results of fenoterol and
epinephrine interaction in patients’ airways.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We examined 396 asthmatic patients aged 16-69 years and
analyzed their clinical records. There were 278 women (mean age±SEM 43.2±0.67 years) and
118 men (mean age±SEM 41.1±1.22 years). Past allergic history was found in 42 patients:
they were hypersensitive to house dust and animal hair. However, desensitization therapy
was not effective and attempts to eliminate the causative allergen failed. 52 patients had
intolerance to aspirin and other non-steroid antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID); 24 patients
were cigarette smokers and 74 — ex-smokers. The smoking duration was from 1 to 30 years.
109 patients were given a steroid therapy: 70 subjects — peroral (5-20 mg/day of
prednisolone) and 39 subjects — inhaled steroids (300-400 mcg twice a day of
beclomethasone dipropionate).
The examination program consisted of the pulmonary function (PF) investigation,
pharmacological testing using fenoterol (Fen), epinephrine (Epi), as well as evaluation of
the illness duration (Till) and the reversibility of bronchial obstruction (RBO).
Investigation of the PF was carried out with the patients having an empty stomach. Eight
hours prior to the PF investigation, sympathomimetics were not given, and 12 h before the
investigation theophylline preparations were withdrawn. The scheme of the pharmacological
testing differed from the generally accepted in clinical practice. The main difference was
in the sequence of the testing:
Evaluation of the PF indices was carried out by means of different computer spirometers
(made by «Cosmed» and «Vitalograph» companies) but the results were expressed as a
percent of identical predicted values [5]. All the changes of the PF indices during the
pharmacological testing: «+» — increasing or «-» — decreasing were also calculated
as a percent of predicted values since it permits to estimate more objectively a
reversibility of airflow obstruction [6].
The changes exceeding 10% of predicted values were accepted as reliable.
The reversibility of bronchial obstruction was calculated as follows:
RBO = FEV1ini + ReFEV1fen + ReFEV1epi |
where:
FEV1ini = initial forced expiratory volume per the 1st sec; | ReFEV1fen = response to Fen; | ReFEV1epi = response to Epi |
The illness duration (Till) was determined as a length of
the period from the appearance of the first asthmatic symptoms: persistent cough, dyspnea,
wheezing and breathlessness up to moment of the patient's investigation and was confirmed
more precisely by the clinical records data.
Statistical analysis of the obtained results was performed by applying the methods of
variation statistic and correlation analysis. In cases of normal distribution of signs
Student's unpaired and paired t-tests were used and linear correlation was calculated. In
cases of abnormal distribution of signs non-parametric methods were used: Wilkoxon's
unpaired criterion as well as Spearman's correlation were calculated [7].
RESULTS
The initial analysis of the obtained results was carried out according only to the values of the FEV1.
The initial PF evaluation in the studied population
revealed, that the FEV1 index in 116 subject exceeded 80% of predicted values.
It should be noted that 53 of them were in clinical remission, 30 — completed before the
investigation the course of steroid treatment and 33 patients received peroral or inhaled
steroids. The remaining 280 patients with FEV1=80% and lower were in
exacerbation phase in spite of the fact that 76 of them were given long term peroral and
inhaled steroid therapy. At first all the patients were divided into 4 groups according to
the PF state: a) FEV1>80%; b) FEV1=61-80%; c) FEV1=41-60%
and d) FEV1=40% and lower. The results of pharmacological testing and
reversibility of bronchial obstruction in these groups are presented in
Table 1 . The results of pharmacological testing and
reversibility of bronchial obstruction
depending on the initial values of FEV1 in the studied population (means±SEM)
FEV1 values in groups | FEV1, % | ReFEV1fen, % | ReFEV1epi, % | RBO, % | Till, years |
a) above 80% (n=116) | 93.8 ±0.84 |
8.4 ±0.60 |
-0.2 ±0.60 |
100.0 ±1.15 |
8.0 ±0.67 |
b) 80-61% (n=158) | 69.8 ±0.50 ** |
12.3 ±0.73 ** |
-0.4 ±0.81 |
81.7 ±1.08 ** |
9.1 ±0.54 *W |
c) 60-41% (n=99) | 51.9 ±0.61 ** |
16.1 ±0.88 ** |
-0.6 ±0.99 |
67.4 ±1.50 ** |
11.0 ±0.79 * |
d) 40% and less (n=23) | 33.8 ±1.25 ** |
24.7 ±2.20 ** |
-3.4 ±2.08 |
55.0 ±3.23 ** |
15.7 ±2.17 * |
FEV1 — forced expiratory volume per the 1st sec; | ReFEV1fen — response to fenoterol; | ReFEV1epi — response to epinephrine; |
* — Student's test (* — p<0.05, ** — p<0.01),
*W — Wilkoxon's test (p<0.05): group b) vs. group a), group d) vs. group c);
RBO — reversibility of bronchial obstruction; Till — duration of illness.
As it is seen from this table on the one hand the worsening of the disease is revealed by the decreasing of FEV1 and on the other hand the increasing of Till is accompanied with increasing of bronchial response to fenoterol. At the same time the reversibility of airflow obstruction is on decrease. As to response to epinephrine the absolutely evident fact is that it does not exceed 10% of predicted values in all the groups constituted in this manner.
For further analysis all the patients were divided into groups
depending not only on the values of FEV1 but also on the response to
epinephrine
Table 2. Patients' investigation results depending on the
initial FEV1 values and response to epinephrine
in the studied population (means±SEM)
Patients’groups | FEV1, % | ReFEV1fen, % | ReFEV1epi, % | FEF25-75, % | ReFEF fen, % | ReFEF epi, % | Till, years |
The 1st (n=29) | 96.0 ±1.61 |
6.1 ±1.23 |
7.6 ±0.84 |
62.8 ±3.28 |
13.3 ±2.12 |
19.5 ±1.83 |
6.1 ±0.97 |
The 2nd (n=14) | 97.9 ±3.67 NS |
9.2 ±1.95 NS |
-7.9 ±0.68 ** |
58.4 ±5.24 NS |
18.7 ±3.59 NS |
-17.5 ±1.29 ** |
7.4 ±1.75 NS |
The 3rd (n=73) | 92.4 ±1.00 *W |
10.5 ±0.71 * |
0.4 ±0.39 ** |
55.7 ±1.89 NS |
19.9 ±1.59 * |
0.1 ±0.68 ** |
8.5 ±0.92 *W |
The 4th (n=58) | 67.1 ±1.31 ** |
5.58 ±0.54 NS |
0.1 ±0.58 ** |
31.6 ±1.20 ** |
8.0 ±0.76 NS |
-0.7 ±1.19 ** |
9.9 ±1.09 *W |
The 5th (n=129) | 58.2 ±1.16 ** |
19.1 ±0.57 ** |
-0.1 ±0.30 NS |
25.5 ±0.79 ** |
26.6 ±1.01 ** |
0.1 ±0.61 NS |
10.1 ±0.66 *W |
The 6th (n=52) | 61.2 ±1.64 ** |
13.7 ±1.51 ** |
18.5 ±0.70 ** |
28.2 ±1.37 NS |
21.9 ±2.17 ** |
19.0 ±1.46 ** |
10.9 ±1.02 *W |
The 7th (n=41) | 61.7 ±2.09 * |
13.5 ±1.94 ** |
-20.4 ±1.48 ** |
29.4 ±2.36 NS |
17.0 ±2.62 ** |
-22.4 ±2.44 ** |
12.0 ±1.26 *W |
FEV1 — forced expiratory volume per the 1st sec; FEF25-75 — forced expiratory flow between 25 and 75% of forced vital capacity; |
ReFEV1fen, ReFEF fen — response to fenoterol; | ReFEV1epi, ReFEF epi — response to epinephrine; |
Till — duration of illness;* — Student's test (* —
p<0.05, ** — p<0.01), *W — Wilkoxon's test (p<0.05): the 2nd, the 3d and the
4th groups vs. the 1st group,
the 5th, the 6th and the 7th group vs. the 4th group; NS — non significant.
The table 2 shows that the first three groups included
subjects with FEV1 value exceeded 80% and different response to epinephrine:
the first group consisted of patients with a proven positive response (increase of FEF25-75
exceeded 10% of predicted values).
The second group according to this criterion included the patients with negative response
to epinephrine and the third one demonstrated the lack of the response to this
pharmacological agent. A reliable positive response to fenoterol (taking into account the
changes of FEF25-75) was commonly recorded in all these three groups. A
difference between the changes in FEV1 index in these groups was not taken into
account because in two of them it did not exceed 10% of predicted values. The 4th, 5th,
6th and 7th groups comprised subjects with the FEV1 values 80% and less of
predicted ones. The bronchial response to epinephrine in these patients was also
different: the 4th and the 5th groups were presented by subjects with the lack of reaction
to epinephrine. They differed one from the other only by the response to fenoterol (taking
into account FEV1 as well as FEF25-75 indices): in the 5th group it
exceeded and in the 4th group it did not exceeded 10% of predicted values. The patients of
the 6th and the 7th groups had the absolutely contrary response to epinephrine: in the
first case it was positive (increase of the FEV1 and FEF25-75
indices) and in the second case — negative (decrease of all the PF indices).
The clinical manifestations of epinephrine inhalation in patients of the 6th and 7th
groups was quite different. The subjects of the 6th group felt an additional relief in
their breathe after the epinephrine inhalation in comparison with fenoterol one. In
patients of the 7th group epinephrine inhalation caused intensive cough with expiratory
dyspnea and widespread rhonchi were heard through — out the chest. Then in 20 subjects
of this group epinephrine inhalation and performing repeated spirometric measurement
resulted in severe breathlessness which was abolished only by intravenous injection of 240
mg aminophylline and 90 mg prednisolone. In other patients of this group epinephrine
inhalation stimulated cough and in some time all the subjects felt dyspnea. As to the
response to fenoterol it was markedly positive in all the groups of patients except the
4th one. Mean duration of illness (Till) was the lowest in the first group and the highest
in the last group.
The obtained results demonstrate the fact that asthmatics differ not only according to the
PF indices values but also according to responses to fenoterol and epinephrine which can
be absolutely contradictory. Of interest is the fact that judging from individual
peculiarities, habits and steroid treatment all the groups were relatively homogenous
Table 3. Individual peculiarities of the patients under study
Patients | The 1st group (n=29) |
The 2nd group (n=14) |
The 3rd group (n=73) |
The 4th group (n=58) |
The 5th group (n=129) |
The 6th group (n=52) |
The 7th group (n=41) |
Males | 6 | 4 | 16 | 22 | 42 | 19 | 11 |
Females | 23 | 10 | 57 | 36 | 87 | 33 | 30 |
On the steroid therapy |
6 | 4 | 23 | 11 | 39 | 12 | 14 |
Smokers or ex-smokers |
6 | 3 | 12 | 17 | 33 | 16 | 12 |
Intolerance to NSAID | 2 | 3 | 11 | 10 | 14 | 5 | 7 |
To define more precisely the mechanism of bronchodilation
or bronchoconstriction resulted by the epinephrine inhalation 30 patients of the 6th and
21 patients of the 7th groups were repeatedly tested using a selective antiedematous
alfa-stimulator naphazoline nitrate (Naph) instead of epinephrine following the same
scheme. The changes of FEV1 to Naph inhalation were 15.8±1.68 and -18.6±2.59
correspondingly (means±SEM). This result is completely analogous to the epinephrine
action.
To prove the independence of bronchial response to epinephrine from that to fenoterol in
performing sequential testing, 21 subjects with absence of reliable response to fenoterol
were selected from the 1st and the 6th as well as from the 2nd and 7th groups
Table 4. Investigation results in patients with the lack of a
reliable response to fenoterol
(means±SEM)
Patients groups | FEV1, % | ReFEV1fen, % | ReFEV1epi, % | FEF25-75, % | ReFEF fen, % | ReFEF epi, % | Till, years |
ReEpi+ (n=11) | 81.3 ±5.18 |
-3.6 ±0.98 |
13.6 ±2.04 |
45.0 ±4.90 |
-0.5 ±2.58 |
24.7 ±6.05 |
6.2 ±1.57 |
ReEpi- (n=10) | 83.5 ±4.79 NS |
-3.8 ±0.62 |
-12.7 ±4.27 ** |
47.4 ±5.80 NS |
-5.4 ±1.27 |
-17.4 ±6.80 ** |
11.7 ±2.80 *W |
Epi+ — a positive response to epinephrine in group of patients; Epi- — a negative response to epinephrine in group of patients;
FEV1 — forced expiratory volume per the 1st sec; FEF25-75 — forced expiratory flow between 25 and 75% of forced vital capacity; |
ReFEV1fen, ReFEF fen — response to fenoterol; | ReFEV1epi, ReFEF epi — response to epinephrine; | Till — duration of illness; |
** — Student's test (p<0.01), *W — Wilkoxon's test (p<0.05): the group Epi- vs. the group Epi+; NS — non significant.
The data of the table 4 show that despite the fact that in
all these patients the bronchodilating effect of fenoterol was not registered, the
inhalation of epinephrine induced bronchodilation in one part of patients and
bronchoconstriction in the other. It is quite obvious that the mean value of illness
duration is almost twice higher in the second case that in the first. The obtained results
suggest that a bronchial response to epinephrine (after the preliminary inhalation of
fenoterol) can be manifested as an additional bronchodilation or bronchoconstriction of
different grade.
Thus the obtained data show that evolution in bronchial obstruction in asthmatics
manifests not only by a decrease of the PF indices but also by a change in bronchial
response to pharmacological agents, as well as by an appearance of bronchoconstriction to
epinephrine.
DISCUSSION
The first analysis of the investigation results
Some what a different situation was observed when the patients were distributed not only
by the values of the FEV1 index but also by the bronchial response to
epinephrine
Thus summing up one may conclude that evolution of airflow obstruction in asthmatics is
manifested through a change of the bronchial response to epinephrine
A further progression of bronchial obstruction in asthmatics is closely connected with an
appearance of a steady smooth muscle spasm (the 3rd group). At this stage the ratio
between the bronchodilation and bronchoconstriction to epinephrine is probably 1:1 that is
deduced from the lack of proven response to this agent. The further evolution of airflow
obstruction in asthmatics (on average 10 years later of its debut) has apparently two
pathways: the first is based on irreversible obstruction progression (the 4th group) and
the second — on the bronchial smooth muscle spasm enhancement (the 5th group). In both
cases an essential decrease of all the PF indices (FEV1 and FEF25-75)
is observed. One can see the lack of bronchial response to epinephrine in these groups but
the difference in fenoterol action. In the 4th group the lack of reliable response to
fenoterol is connected probably with bronchial obturation with mucus plugs as a result of
severe expectoration disorders [9, 10]. On the contrary in the 5th group the value of
bronchial response to fenoterol is the highest.
The next stage of evolution in airflow obstruction of asthmatics is connected with the
appearance of the second inflammation «wave» also accompanied with a positive response
to epinephrine (the 6th group in
Thus a certain sequence of the pathophysiological events in evolution of airflow
obstruction in asthmatics has been revealed (fig. 1): against the background of PF
impairment as far as of increasing of illness duration (Till), one can see the appearance
of two positive and two negatives «waves» representing the bronchial response to
epinephrine.
Fig. 1. Evolution of airflow obstruction in asthmatics
Of note is the fact that bronchoconstrictive effect of
epinephrine exceeds its bronchodilating action. Our data concerning the duration of
illness from
Thus the first inflammation «wave» results in the development of different types of
airflow obstruction: with bronchospasm (the 5th group) or irreversible obstruction (the
4th group). The onset of a new — the second inflammation «wave» and further
progression of bronchial obstruction results in a pronounced alpha-induced
bronchoconstriction and non-controlled situation (the 7th group). If one assumes that
evolution in asthma gives the example of a naturally determined phenomenon, its further
development may be presented in two ways (fig. 1 — dotted line): an aggravation of
irreversible obstruction (the lack of a reliable response to fenoterol) or an enhancement
of bronchospasm (the presence of a reliable response to this agent). In the latter case
the administration of beta-2-agonists proves to be efficient but in the former case it
does not. The result of the former case may be catastrophic. As to the patients with a
bronchospasm prevalence in the airflow obstruction survived the second inflammation
«wave», the further evolution in their asthma is probably determined by the appearance
of the third «wave» of inflammation and recurrence of the above-described
pathophysiological events.
A reasoning about the evolution in asthma as a naturally determined «wave live»
phenomenon does not imply, for example, that at one or another stage of this process one
can observe sole alpha-induced bronchodilation or bronchoconstriction. But probably every
stage of the evolution in airflow obstruction in asthmatics is characterized by the
frequency prevalence of the determined response to the beta- and alpha-adrenostimulation.
As to the pharmacological testing performing solely with selective beta-2-sympathomimetics
its possibilities do not permit in a similar at the first sight population to reveal all
the peculiarities of the development and further evolution of airflow obstruction in
asthmatics. And this thesis is obviously illustrated by the data from
Pharmacological testing according to the suggested scheme
facilitates to distinguish several types of the airflow obstruction irrespective of its
expression
a) BRONCHOSPASTIC type (the 3rd and 5th groups). A prevailed mechanism of the airflow
obstruction in this case is the bronchial smooth muscle spasm.
b) INFLAMMATORY-EDEMATOUS type (the 1st and 6th groups). This type of airflow obstruction
is characterized by the combination of bronchial smooth muscle spasm and mucosa edema.
c) ALPHA-BRONCHOCONSTRICTIVE type (the 2nd and 7th groups) is characterized by the
presence of the bronchial smooth muscle spasm and a perverted response to epinephrine;
d) IRREVERSIBLE type of the airflow obstruction probably is connected with severe
expectoration disturbances.
Determination of the different types of bronchial obstruction gives the possibility to
carry out more precise treatment changing in case of necessity steroid therapy. And the
main criteria of management efficacy are the following: an increase of the PF indices up
to the maximal normal values, a decrease of the severity of bronchospasm (as judged by
response to fenoterol) accompanied with an increase of the bronchial obstruction
reversibility, as well as disappearance of alpha-induced bronchoconstriction (as judged by
response to epinephrine or selective alpha-stimulators).
CONCLUSION
Summarizing the above discussion of the investigation we may rightfully state that the evolution of airflow obstruction in asthmatics characterized not only by quantitative (a decrease of the PF indices), but also qualitative (a different response to epinephrine) changes in the respiratory tract. The evolution in asthma proves to be a naturally determined process despite the fact that an objective situation not always corresponds to its subjective estimation of the patient or his physician. And natural laws of asthma evolution determine the occurrence of favourable or unfavourable periods in the patients' life, a risk of sudden death and prognosis of the disease.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author would like to express his gratitude to companies «VITALOGRAPH Ltd.» and «COSMED» for their help in supplying spirometers, used in carrying out this investigation.
REFERENCES
1. Pauwels R., Snashall P.D. A practical Approach to
Asthma. CBA Publishing Services. Printed by Adlard & Son Ltd, Dorking., 1986; 167 p.
2. Finucane KE, Greville HW, Brown PJE: Irreversible airflow obstruction. Evolution in
asthma. Med J Austr 1985; 142: 602-604.
3. Sly RM: Mortality from asthma. J Allergy Clin Immun 1989; 84: 421-434.
4. Miras A, Tabib A, Tachean G, Maligier: La mort subite dans l'asthme. Rev SAMU. 1989;
12: N 6 Spec.: 282-285.
5. Morris JF, Koski A, Breese JD: Normal values and Evaluation of Forced End-Expiratory
Flow. Amer Rev Resp Dis 1975; 111: 755-762.
6. Brown RD, Grattan G: Reversibility of airflow obstruction. Lancet 1988; 1: 586-587.
7. Glantz SA. Primer of biostatistics. NY, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1994.
8. International Consensus Report on Diagnosis and Treatment of Asthma. U. S. Department
of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, 1992.
9. Kanner RE, Watanabe S. The Role of the Pulmonary Function Laboratory in Patients with
Bron-chial Asthma; in Gershwin M.E. (ed.): Bronchial Asthma. Principles of Diagnosis and
Treatment. Grune & Stratton. New York. 1981, pp. 101-115.
10. Wanner A. Morphologic Basis of Airflow Obstruction; in Gershwin M.E.(ed.): Bronchial
Asthma. Principles of Diagnosis and Treatment. Grune & Stratton. New York. 1981, pp.
89-100.
11. Picado C, Montserrat JM, Pablo J, Augusti-Vival A: Predisposing factor to death after
recovery from a life-threatening asthmatic attack. J Asthma 1989; 26: 231-236.
Dr. Victor N. Solopov
2/9-316 Chicherine str.
129327, Moscow, Russia
Tel. (095) 189-5988
www.asthma.ru
E-mail: asthma@consultant.ru