Emergency. 2017; 5 (1): e35 OR I G I N A L RE S E A RC H Methyl prednisolone vs Dexamethasone in Management of COPD Exacerbation; a Randomized Clinical Trial Mohammad Emami Ardestani1, Elham Kalantary1∗, Vajihe Samaiy1, Keramat Taherian2 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. Received: November 2015; Accepted: January 2016; Published online: 11 January 2017 Abstract: Introduction: Corticosteroids are routinely used in management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbation.The main purpose of present study was to compare the efficacy of methyl prednisolone (MP) and dexamethasone (DXM) forthis purpose. Methods: Adult COPD patients entered the present clinical trial.All patients received standard treatment on admission andwere then divided into 2 groups of intravenous MP and DXM. Patients were asked to rate their shortness of breath; sputum volume and viscosity; dyspnea; cough; and general wellbeing on a 0-5 scale. Baseline parameters such as O2 saturation, arterial blood gas pa- rameters, and white blood cell (WBC) count were compared on admission and day 7 and 14 of therapy using SPSS 22. Results: 68 patients were randomly allocated to 2 groups of 34(82.4% male). The baseline character- istics of the two groups were similar (p < 0.05). Comparison of treatment outcomes for the 7th day showed a significant difference between the 2 groups only regarding cough (p = 0.047), H C O3 (p < 0.001), and O2 satura- tion (p = 0.042). Onday 14 the 2 groups were different only regarding cough (p = 0.048) and sputum viscosity (p = 0.011). There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding trend of changes in dyspnea (p = 0.02 ; DXM À MP) and cough (p = 0.035; MP À DXM). There were no significant differences between the two medications regarding side effects on 7th and 14th day after treatment. Conclusion:It seems that MP and DXM have similar efficacy and side effects in treatment of COPD exacerbation and selecting drug of choice would better be based on the most prominent symptoms of patients on admission. Keywords: Methylprednisolone; dexamethasone; pulmonary disease, chronic obstructive © Copyright (2017) Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences Cite this article as: Emami Ardestani M, Kalantary M, Samaiy V, Taherian K. Methyl prednisolone vs Dexamethasone in Management of COPD Exacerbation; a Randomized Clinical Trial. Emergency. 2017; 5 (1): e35. 1. Introduction Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the most prominent cause of morbidity and mortality in developed countriesand has raised to become the third cause of mortal- ity worldwide (1-4). In accordance with international guide- lines (GOLD), the diagnosis of COPD should be confirmed with a spirometry result showing a post-bronchodilator value of FEV1/ FVC ratio <0.7 (5). The key interventions on COPD exacerbationis to control airway inflammation, relieve air- flowobstruction and improve ventilation (6). Corticosteroids are a large group of drugs used in COPD exacerbation and ∗Corresponding Author: Elham Kalantary; Department of Internal Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran. Tel/Fax: 00989133011866; Email: elham_kalantari@ymail.com are chosen based on clinical presentations of the patient. It has been shown that using systemic corticosteroids for treating exacerbation of COPD leads to reduced failed treat- ments and improves lung function in the first 72 hours and shortens hospital stay in non- critically ill patients (7-10). Different types of corticosteroidswith different characteris- tics, such as methyl prednisolone (MP) and dexamethasone (DXM), have been used in this regard(11, 12). Based on the above-mentioned points, the main purpose of present study was to compare the efficacyof MP and DXM in treatment of COPD exacerbation. 2. Methods 2.1. Study design and settings This is a prospective, randomized, single-blind trial con- ducted between 2013 and 2014 in Al-Zahra Hospital, Isfa- This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com elham_kalantari@ymail.com M. Emami Ardestani et al. 2 han, Iran. The institutional review board of Isfahan Univer- sity of Medical Sciences approved the study protocol. All pa- tients gave their written informed consent and the protocol was approved by the hospital’s Ethics Committee. The re- searchers adhered to the principles of Helsinki Declaration over the course of the study. The protocol of the present study was registered on Iranian registry of clinical trials under IRCT number: 2.2. Participants All studied patients met the criteria outlined in the guidelines for diagnosis and management of COPD, established by the GOLD standard (13). Adult COPD patients with acute res- piratory distress, increasedcough frequency and severity, in- creased sputum volume, and/or increased wheezing for 24 hours or more were eligible for entry to the study. Patients with history of asthma or atopy, onset of respiratory distress before the age of 35 years, absence of spirometric data, or having received oral or intravenous steroids in the month prior to presentation were excluded. The 68 cases were ran- domly allocated to two equal groups of 34, using simple ran- domization method. Patients and data analyser were blinded to type of treatment. 2.3. Intervention On admission to ED, oxygen therapy was performed until O2 saturation raised to above 88-90%. In addition, all individ- uals in both groups received a combination of a macrolide (azithromycin) and a third generation cephalosporin (cef- triaxone); nebulized β2-agonist (salbutamol), anticholiner- gic agent (ipratropium bromide), and inhaled corticosteroid (budesonide). They were then divided into 2 groups of MP and DXM for receiving intravenous (IV ) corticosteroid. The MP group received 2 mg/kg/day MP intravenously for 3 days. Then the dose was reduced to 40 mg for 3 days and switched to 30 mg/day of oral prednisone, which was tapered every 3 days with 5 mg decrease in dosage. Then inhaled budes- onide, 400 micrograms, twice a day was prescribed. Pred- nisone was tapered for 2 weeks, and then ceased. Inhaled corticosteroid had to be used for at least 3 months con- tinuously. The second group (DXM group) received 0.375 mg/kg DXM per day, and then its dosage was gradually ta- pered. After 7 to 14 days, the drug was replaced by 30 mg/day methyl prednisone, and continued by the same protocol as MP group. 2.4. Assessments Patients were assessed within an hour of admission and then every day for two weeks to evaluate the therapeutic effect of treatment and the side effects. Questions were asked about shortness of breath; sputum volume and viscosity; dyspnea; cough; and general wellbeing on admission and on every day of therapy. Patients were asked to score each symptom from 0 (much better than usual) to 5 (much worse than usual). Base- line parameters such as O2 saturation, arterial blood gaspa- rameters, andwhite blood cell (WBC) count were evaluated on admission and on day 7 and 14 of therapy. Potential cor- ticosteroid side effects such as mood changes, heartburn, overt gastrointestinal bleeding, and blood sugar disturbance were recorded in every visit. 2.5. Statistical analysis Sample size was calculated to be 33 in each group based on Zα = 1.96, Zβ = 0.84, s = 12.4, and d = 8.6. All data from the patients were analysed using independent sample T- test or Mann-Whitney U test for quantitative variables and Chi- square test for qualitative variables. Chi- square for trend analysis was used to compare trend of changes in sputum volume and viscosity as well as dyspnea and cough between the two groups.A value of p < 0.05 was consideredto indicate statistical significance. All data are reported as mean ± stan- dard deviation (SD). Analyses were done using SPSS software version 22.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL). 3. Results 68 COPD patients were randomly allocated to 2 equal groups of DXM (82.3% male) and MP (82.4% male). The mean age of DXM and MP groups were 74.67 ± 1.79 and 73.35 ± 2.25 years, respectively (p = 0.648). Baseline characteristics of the two groups were compared in table 1. There were no significant differences between the two medications regarding side ef- fects on 7th and 14th day after treatment (table 2). Outcome of studied groups on 7th and 14th days after treatment were presented in table 3 and figure 1. 7-day treatment outcome Comparison of treatment outcomes for the 7th day showed a significant difference between the 2 groups only regarding cough (p = 0.047; remission: MP: 23 (67.7%) vs. DXM: 16 (48.5%) ), HCO3 (MP: 22.58 ± 3.62 vs DXM: 25.66 ± 2.82; p < 0.001), and O2 saturation (MP: 87.71 ± 3.15 vs DXM: 89.24 ± 2.88; p = 0.042). 14-day treatment outcome Comparison of treatment outcomes for the 14th day showed a significant difference between the 2 groups only regarding cough (p = 0.048; remission: MP: 27 (79.4%) vs. DXM: 25 (75.7%) ) and sputum viscosity (p = 0.011; remission: MP: 34 (100%) vs. DXM: 24 (72.7%) ). Trend of changes There were not any sig- nificant differences between the 2 groups regarding trend of changes in sputum volume (p = 0.05), sputum viscosity (p = 0.24), O2 saturation (p = 0.87), P aC O2 (p = 0.83), H C O3 (p = 0.12), serum pH (p = 0.42), WBC count (p = 0.24), on 7thand 14th day after treatment. There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding trend of changes in dysp- nea (p = 0.02; DXM ÀMP) and cough (p = 0.035; MP À DXM). This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com 3 Emergency. 2017; 5 (1): e35 Table 1: Baseline characteristics of the patients in the two groups Variables Dexamethasone Methylprednisolone P Duration of disease Years 8.02 ± 5.25 8.64 ± 4.61 0.608 Shortness of breath None 4 (11.8) 0(0) 0.792 Mild 3 (8.8) 6 (17.6) Moderate 7 (20.6) 8 (23.5) Severe 20 (58.8) 20 (58.8) Cough None 4 (11.8) 0(0) 0.556 Mild 2 (5.9) 3 (8.8) Moderate 9 (26.5) 11 (32.4) Severe 19 (55.9) 20 (58.8) Sputum volume None 8 (23.5) 0(0) 0.081 Mild 5 (14.7) 8 (23.5) Moderate 5 (14.7) 5 (14.7) Severe 16 (47.1) 21 (61.8) High sputum viscosity Yes 18 (52.9) 21 (61.8) 0.624 No 16 (47.1) 13 (38.2) O2 saturation On arrival 79.26 ± 6.61 78.65 ± 8.24 0.734 PaCO2 On arrival 64.85 ± 10.00 64.85 ± 12.52 1.000 HCO3 On arrival 26.55 ± 5.37 27.76 ± 5.52 0.365 PH On arrival 7.32 ± 0.04 7.30 ± 0.05 0.218 White blood cell count/mm3 Before treatment 8.49±3.6 7.35±3.08 0.164 4. Discussion The findings of this study demonstrated that although both treatments are effective and similar in most treatment char- acteristics, MP is better for reducing cough, and sputum vis- cosity, while DXM showed a significantly better trend regard- ing dyspnea treatment and increased O2 saturation, more significantly on the 7th day. Although a significant differ- ence was detected between the 2 groups regarding H C O3, it is not clinically significant. Despite accepted effects of corti- costeroids on airflow obstruction relief and being usedsince 1950, drug of choice, optimal dose, and duration of treat- ment remain unclear(14). Several studieshave demonstrated that corticosteroids can significantly improve patients symp- toms and lung function (15-18). Li et al. had compared MP with DXM, with the same dosage as this study, in acute exac- erbation of COPD and believed that DXM was less effective than MP, as cough and sputum in MP group were relieved more quickly than DXM group (6). The present study also showed a significant difference in cough relief in MP group. Yet, although the change in trend was similar in both groups, MP group showed significantly better sputum viscosity re- mission only on the 14th day. Zhao et al. also compared these drugs in severe pediatric asthmatic bronchitis and con- cluded that MP is superior to DXM for this purpose. However, in contrast to the present findings, they demonstrated that MP retrieves hypoxia quickly (19). Li et al. also demonstrated that, there was no striking difference in blood gas improve- ment between the two groups, although the effect of MP seemed slightly superior to that of DXM (6). This is in con- trast to our results showing higher O2 saturation on the 7th day in DXM group. Andre et al. compared MP and DXM in premature infants who were at risk of chronic lung diseases and concluded that MP is as efficient as DXM with fewer side effects (20). In this study, we found that they were both effec- tive, but they were not significantly different regarding side effects. DXM has well- known pharmacologic properties, in- cluding duration of action of up to 72 hours, a relatively long half-life, and excellent bioavailability (21). As a result, it has been proffered as an alternative to prednisone thatmay allow shorter treatment regimens and improved compliance. Joel Kravitz et al. indicated that 2 days of oral DXM is at least as effective as 5 days of prednisone in the treatment of mild to This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com M. Emami Ardestani et al. 4 Table 2: Comparison of drug side effects between the two groups on 7th and 14th days Complications/side effects Number (%) P Dexamethasone Methylprednisolone Gastrointestinal bleeding 7 3 (9.1) 2 (5.9) 0.67 14 3 (9.1) 5 (14.7) 0.71 Mood change 7 0 (0) 2 (5.9) 0.49 14 0 (0) 3 (8.8) 0.24 Heart burn 7 6 (18.2) 4 (11.8) 0.51 14 9 (27.3) 6 (17.6) 0.39 Blood sugar disturbance 7 6 (18.2) 4 (11.8) 0.51 14 9 (27.3) 6 (17.6) 0.39 moderate asthma exacerbation. Relapse and treatment fail- urerates were equivalent in both groups (22). It seems that selection of corticosteroids in COPD exacerbation should be performed based on the most prominent symptom of pa- tients. In cough prominent cases, MP seems to have better effects and in sputum prominent cases, DXM is superior. 5. Limitations Single blinding (drug administrator was not binded), lack of long term follow-up regarding times of readmission with ex- acerbation, and qualitative measurement based on patient- declaration are among the most important limitations of present study. 6. Conclusion Our study showed that MP and DXM have similar efficacy and side effects in treatment of patients with COPD exacer- bation and selectingdrug of choicewouldbetter be basedon the most prominent symptoms of patients. 7. Appendix 7.1. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the staff of Al- Zahra Hospi- tal, Isfahan, Iran. 7.2. Funding None. 7.3. Conflict of interest None. 7.4. Author contribution All authors met the four criteria of authorship as recom- mended by international committee of medical journal ed- itors. References 1. Sutherland ER, Martin RJ. Airway inflammation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: comparisons with asthma. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 2003; 112(5): 819-27. 2. Murray CJ, Lopez AD. Alternative projections of mortal- ity and disability by cause 1990- 2020: Global Burden of Disease Study. The Lancet. 1997; 349(9064): 1498- 504. 3. Rafael L, Mohsen N, Kyle F. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Dis- ease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380:2095-128. 4. Burney PG, Patel J, Newson R, Minelli C, Naghavi M. Global and regional trends in COPD mortality, 1990- 2010. European Respiratory Journal. 2015; 45(5): 1239- 47. 5. Vestbo J, Hurd SS, Agust’ AG, Jones PW, Vogelmeier C, Anzueto A, et al. Global Strategy for the Diagnosis, Man- agement, and Prevention of Chronic Obstructive Pul- monary Disease. American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine. 2013; 187 (4): 347-65. 6. Li H, HE G, CHU H, ZHAO L, Yu H. A step- wise appli- cation of methylprednisolone versus dexamethasone in the treatment of acute exacerbations of COPD. Respirol- ogy. 2003; 8(2): 199-204. 7. Wood-Baker R, Gibson P, Hannay M, Walters E, Wal- ters J. Systemic corticosteroids for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Cochrane Library. 2005. 8. Woods JA, Wheeler JS, Finch CK, Pinner NA. Corticos- teroids in the treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. 2014; 9: 421. 9. Walters JA, Gibson PG, Wood-Baker R, Hannay M, Wal- ters EH. Systemic corticosteroids for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The Cochrane Library. 2009. 10. Abroug F, Ouanes I, Abroug S, Dachraoui F, Abdallah SB, Hammouda Z, et al. Systemic corticosteroids in acute ex- acerbation of COPD: a meta-analysis of controlled stud- ies with emphasis on ICU patients. Annals of intensive care. 2014; 4(1): 32. 11. Koc I, Gogebakan B, Bayraktar R, Tasdemir D, Ozdemir U, Adcock I, et al. Effects of dexamethasone and anti- inflammatory drugs on inflammatory cytokines from bronchial epithelial cells of COPD patients. European This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com 5 Emergency. 2017; 5 (1): e35 Figure 1: Failure rate of dexamethasone and prednisolone in treatment of sputum volume (A), sputum viscosity (B), dyspnea (C), and cough (D). Respiratory Journal. 2015; 46 (suppl 59). 12. Sun X, He Z, Zhang J, Deng J, Bai J, Li M, et al. Compare the efficacy of inhaled budesonide and systemic methyl- prednisolone on systemic inflammation of AECOPD. Pul- monary pharmacology, therapeutics. 2015; 31: 111-6. 13. Pauwels RA, Buist AS, Ma P, Jenkins CR, Hurd SS, Com- mittee GS. Global strategy for the diagnosis, manage- ment, and prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and World Health Organization Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD): executive summary. Respiratory care. 2001; 46(8): 798. 14. Bullard MJ, Liaw S-J, Tsai Y-H, Min HP. Early corticos- teroid use in acute exacerbations of chronic airflow ob- struction. The American journal of emergency medicine. 1996; 14(2): 139-43. 15. Davies L, Angus R, Calverley P. Oral corticosteroids in patients admitted to hospital with exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a prospective randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. 1999; 354(9177): 456-60. 16. Sharma R, Lettis S, Calverley P, Barnes N. Do Inhaled Cor- ticosteroids (icss) Reduce Rate Of Decline Of Lung Func- tion In COPD Patients With Eosinophil Count≥ 2% Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2015; 191: A3976. 17. Magnussen H, Tetzlaff K, Bateman ED, Watz H, Kirsten AM, Wouters EF, et al. Lung-function changes over time following withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in pa- tients with severe COPD. European Respiratory Journal. 2015: ERJ- 01644- 2015. 18. Magnussen H, Tetzlaff K, Bateman ED, Watz H, Kirsten AM, Wouters EF, et al. Lung-function changes over time following withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroids in pa- tients with severe COPD. European Respiratory Journal. 2015: ERJ- 01644- 2015. 19. ZHAO H-x, CAO M, LIU H-y. Effect analysis of methyl- prednisolone in treating the severe children asthmatic bronchitis. Jilin Medical Journal. 2012; 34: 013. This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com M. Emami Ardestani et al. 6 20. Andre P, Thebaud B, Odievre M, Razafimahefa H, Zu- pan V, Dehan M, et al. Methylprednisolone, an alterna- tive to dexamethasone in very premature infants at risk of chronic lung disease. Intensive care medicine. 2000; 26(10): 1496-500. 21. Dernedorf H HG, Mollmann H. Receptor based pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics analysis of corticosteroids. J Clin Pharmacol. 1993; 33: 115-23. 22. Kravitz J, Dominici P, Ufberg J, Fisher J, Giraldo P. Two days of dexamethasone versus 5 days of prednisone in the treatment of acute asthma: a randomized controlled trial. Annals of emergency medicine. 2011; 58(2): 200-4. This open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 3.0 License (CC BY-NC 3.0). Downloaded from: www.jemerg.com Introduction Methods Results Discussion Limitations Conclusion Appendix References