Abstract
While systemic corticosteroids quicken patient recovery during acute exacerbations of COPD, they also have many adverse effects. The optimal duration of corticosteroid administration remains uncertain. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare patient outcomes between short-(≤7 day) and long- (>7 day) corticosteroid regimens in adults with acute exacerbations of COPD.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and hand searches were used to identify eight eligible RCTs and three retrospective cohort studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool and ROBINS-I. Data were summarized as odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) whenever possible and qualitatively described otherwise.
A total of 11532 participants were included, with 1296 eligible for meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was present in the methodology and settings of the studies. The OR for mortality was 0.76 (95% CI=0.40–1.44, n=1055). The MD for hospital length-of-stay was -0.91 days (95% CI=-1.81–-0.02 days, n=421). The OR for re-exacerbations was 1.31 (95% CI=0.90–1.90, n=552). The OR for hyperglycemia was 0.90 (95% CI=0.60–1.33, n=423). The OR for infection incidence was 0.96 (95% CI=0.59–1.156, n=389). The MD for one-second forced expiratory volume change was -18.40 mL (95% CI=-111.80–75.01 mL, n=161).
The RCTs generally had low or unclear risks of bias, while the cohort studies had serious or moderate risks of bias. Our meta-analyses were affected by imprecision due to insufficient data. Some heterogeneity was present in the results, suggesting population, setting, and treatment details are potential prognostic factors. Our evidence suggests that short-duration treatments are not worse than long-duration treatments in moderate/severe exacerbations and may lead to considerably better outcomes in milder exacerbations. This supports the current GOLD guidelines for corticosteroid administration.
No funding was given for this review. Our protocol is registered in PROSPERO: CRD42023374410.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Protocols
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=374410
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study used ONLY openly available human data that were originally taken from the previous studies included in this systematic review
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
