OBJECTIVE: An increase in incidence of reversible airflow obstruction and bronchial hyperresponsiveness occurs in patients with bronchiectasis. We conducted a study to assess the efficacy of bronchodilators in the treatment of bronchiectasis.
METHODOLOGY: Twenty-four patients with confirmed bronchiectasis were studied. Each patient inhaled fenoterol 400 microg administered by metered dose inhaler via a spacer after a baseline lung function and a lung function test was repeated 30 min later. This was followed by a second dose of fenoterol 5 mg via nebulizer and another lung function test 30 min later. A repeat study was done at least 24 h later with ipratropium bromide 40 microg by metered dose inhaler and 500 microg by a nebulizer.
RESULTS: The results showed a significant improvement from baselines (mean percentage change +/- SD) of peak expiratory flow rate (PEF) by 8.5 +/- 8.72% and 15.3 +/- 11.63%, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) by 8.77 +/- 9.69% and 10.2 +/- 12.2% and forced vital capacity (FVC) by 10.25 +/- 11.61% and 10.09 +/- 10.88% after low- and high-dose fenoterol, respectively. The improvements after low- and high-dose ipratropium bromide for PEE FEV1 and FVC were 9.89 +/- 9.35% and 14.39 +/- 12.82%, 9.38 +/- 10.41% and 13.52 +/- 17.09%, and 8.03 +/- 10.85% and 9.63 +/- 13.85%, respectively. Eleven patients (45.8%) responded to one or both bronchodilators significantly (> 15% improvement in FEV1). Five patients (20%) responded to both, three (12%) to fenoterol alone and another three (12%) to ipratropium bromide alone.
CONCLUSION: There is significant bronchodilator response in a subset of patients with bronchiectasis and patients with bronchiectasis should therefore undergo bronchodilator testing. Skin prick testing against a panel of nine allergens done on each individual yielded a positive result in 13 patients (54.2%).
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) devices are increasingly being used in the assessment of hypertension. The purpose of the study was to investigate patient's diurnal BP variation and to further determine the differences of BP readings between male and female patients and the effects of age in patients who attended the clinic with essential hypertension. In addition, evidence of relationship between the parameters recorded by 24-hour ABPM was also investigated. This study was conducted in an outpatient specialist clinic. Two indices were used to demonstrate the diurnal BP variation. Firstly, the diurnal systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) variations which were calculated as night/day BP ratio for SBP and DBP respectively. Anyone scoring less than 100% were categorised as dippers. Secondly, nocturnal falls in SBP and DBP were calculated as (awake SBP-sleep SBP)/awake SBP x 100 and (awake DBP-sleep DBP)/awake DBP x 100 respectively. The results showed that there was no significant difference in the mean BP between male and female patients. In general, the study sample were categorised as dippers and non dippers. There were more male dippers than female dippers. Finally correlation analysis revealed that age is related to SBP variables whilst night HR showed positive correlation with night time BP. It is concluded that ABPM was shown to be a useful tool to analyse the variation and prevalence of cardiovascular risk markers in hypertensive patients and can easily be done in an outpatient set-up.