ArticleChronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (Miami, Fla.)2019
Nebulized Versus Dry Powder Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonist Bronchodilators in Patients With COPD and Suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow Rate.
Article in Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (Miami, Fla.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- A 7-point evidence-based care discharge protocol for patients hospitalized for exacerbation of COPD: consensus strategy and expert recommendation.NPJ primary care respiratory medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Peak Inspiratory Flow Rate in COPD: An Analysis of Clinical Trial and Real-World Data.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseTrial
- TRONARTO: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of Tiotropium/Olodaterol Delivered via Soft Mist Inhaler in COPD Patients Stratified by Peak Inspiratory Flow.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseaseTrial
- Changes in device-matched peak inspiratory flow after bedside inhaler coaching and factors associated with residual suboptimal flow: a retrospective observational study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Article
- Evolution of Peak Inspiratory Flow During Hospitalization of Patients with COPD - A Prospective Monocentric Observational Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2025Observational
- Suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow in Patients Hospitalized for COPD Exacerbation: Prevalence and Predictive Factors.Journal of aerosol medicine and pulmonary drug delivery · 2024Article
- Clinical Burden of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Patients with Suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow.Canadian respiratory journal · 2024Article
- Recalibrating Perceptions and Attitudes Toward Nebulizers versus Inhalers for Maintenance Therapy in COPD: Past as Prologue.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2024Review
- Inhaler personalisation based on peak inspiratory flow (PIF) among dry powder inhaler users: a pilot randomised control trial (RCT) in COPD.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2024Article
- Personalizing Selection of Inhaled Delivery Systems in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2023Review
- Inhalable microparticles as drug delivery systems to the lungs in a dry powder formulations.Regenerative biomaterials · 2023Review
- High Prevalence of Suboptimal Peak Inspiratory Flow in Hospitalized Patients With COPD: A Real-world Study.Chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (Miami, Fla.) · 2022Article
- Low Peak Inspiratory Flow Rates are Common Among COPD Inpatients and are Associated with Increased Healthcare Resource Utilization: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Article
- Revefenacin, a once-daily, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, for nebulized maintenance therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2021Review
- The Efficacy and Safety of Revefenacin for the Treatment of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Rapid and Deep versus Normal Breathing in Salbutamol Inhalation Effectiveness; a Letter to Editor.Archives of academic emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Peak-Inspiratory-Flow-Rate Guided Inhalation Therapy Reduce Severe Exacerbation of COPD.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Maintenance Therapy with Nebulizers in Patients with Stable COPD: Need for Reevaluation.Pulmonary therapy · 2020Review
- Review
- Nebulized Therapies in COPD: Past, Present, and the Future.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and suboptimal peak inspiratory flow rate (sPIFR) may not benefit optimally from dry powder inhalers (DPI) because of inadequate inspiratory flow. Nebulized bronchodilators may provide a better alternative. We compared bronchodilation with the long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) revefenacin for nebulization versus the DPI LAMA tiotropium, in patients with COPD and sPIFR (< 60 L/min against the resistance of Diskus®).
methodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, 28-day Phase 3b study in patients with COPD enrolled based on sPIFR. The primary endpoint was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV
resultsWe enrolled 206 patients with mean (standard deviation) age, 65 (8) years; percent predicted FEV
conclusionsRevefenacin did not produce significant improvements in FEV1 versus tiotropium in the ITT population, but increased trough FEV
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.