Lack of effect of theophylline on the outcome of acute cerebral infarction. Controlled trial of intravenous aminophylline in acute cerebral infarction. Intravenous aminophylline in the treatment of acute bronchospastic exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Computer-assisted optimization of aminophylline therapy in the emergency department. Aminophylline for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A controlled trial. Lack of renoprotective effect of theophylline during aortocoronary bypass surgery. A prospective, randomized, open labeled crossover trial of fosinopril and theophylline in post renal transplant erythrocytosis. Aminophylline therapy for acute bronchospastic disease in the emergency room. Aminophylline increases the toxicity but not the efficacy of an inhaled beta-adrenergic agonist in the treatment of acute exacerbations of asthma.
In patients with acute ischemic stroke, dramatic but often transient improvements have been noticed after theophylline injections. Whether better results could be obtained by continuous infusion of the drug was evaluated in a double-blind study. Out of 46 patients with a mean age of 75 years, 22 got theophylline as aminophylline (bolus dose of 230 mg followed by 0.5 mg/kg/h) and 24 placebo during 3 days. The groups were comparable in all aspects at the outset of the trial. Serum theophylline concentrations were kept within the therapeutic range recommended for patients with asthma. No significant difference in outcome was noticed between the groups during the hospital period when repeated neurological assessments by two different scores and mortality were compared. In a double-blind trial intravenous aminophylline was compared with placebo in 79 patients with acute cerebral infarction. Immediate improvement in the neurological evaluation score was significantly more frequent in patients receiving aminophylline (38 per cent) than in those on placebo (15 per cent); only patients with mild or moderately severe strokes responded to the injection. After 3 weeks, however, the treated patients did not fare significantly better than the controls in terms of neurological score and residual disability. Survival rate, length of stay in hospital, and social readaptation were similar in the two groups. It is concluded that intravenous aminophylline in patients with ischaemic strokes can bring about an immediate symptomatic relief, but without appreciably influencing the ultimate recovery. Often chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients treated for acute exacerbations receive intravenous (IV) aminophylline in addition to inhaled bronchodilators that may raise serum levels of theophylline into the toxic range. A double-blind, randomized study of 52 men with COPD who came to the emergency department for treatment of exacerbations was initiated to establish the efficacy and safety of this common practice. After history and physical examination, patients were treated with 28% oxygen by Venturi mask and 0.3 cc metaproterenol sulfate in 2.5 cc saline by nebulizer; an IV line was started and patients received either aminophylline or D5W. Measurements included baseline and two-hour serum theophylline levels, pulmonary function tests, and symptom questionnaires. Mean values from the entire group showed decreases in respiratory rate, cardiac rate, and pulsus paradoxus, and increases in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and vital capacity (VC) over a two-hour treatment period (P less than .01). Despite the increase in serum theophylline in the treatment group, the demographic, clinical, pulmonary function, and outcome data were found to have no statistically significant differences when compared to control patients. The data were then analyzed according to serum theophylline levels. Theophylline level greater than 20 micrograms/mL occurred in 15 patients with no untoward effects; premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) were no more frequent in this group than in those with lower serum theophylline levels. A theophylline level greater than 10 micrograms/mL after two hours of treatment resulted in the following differences, which were not statistically significant: mean FEV1 response less than or equal to 10 micrograms/mL vs greater than 10 micrograms/mL, 20% vs 28%; mean VC change, 17% vs 30%; or mean emergency department returns in one week, 0.1 vs 0.26. In our experience, oxygen and inhaled metaproterenol are effective treatment for exacerbations of COPD. The emergency department (ED) is a unique setting for pharmacokinetic-guided drug administration because of the need to rapidly optimize therapy. We compared outcomes in patients receiving intravenous aminophylline according to population-based ED guidelines (group 1) or Bayesian-derived pharmacokinetic estimates (group 2), we determined predictors for admission or discharge in our study group, and we assessed the ability of a Bayesian pharmacokinetic model to estimate theophylline requirements in the ED. The study population was composed of 82 patients (42 males, 40 females) with a mean age of 43 +/- 15.5 years. Fifteen patients were excluded because of protocol violations. Of the 67 cases studied, 30 were assigned to group 1, and 37 were assigned to group 2. Patient demographics, baseline theophylline concentration, and theophylline loading dose did not differ significantly between treatment groups. The aminophylline maintenance infusion was significantly (P less than .001) lower in group 1 (0.4 +/- 0.2 mg/kg/h) than in group 2 (0.6 +/- 0.2 mg/kg/h). Serum theophylline concentrations at one hour post-loading-dose did not differ significantly between treatment groups; however, significant differences were observed at two hours post-load (P less than .002) and four hours post-load (P less than .001). Baseline peak flow rate (PFR) was significantly (P less than .03) higher in group 1 (170 +/- 85 L/min) than in group 2 (132 +/- 62 L/min), but did not differ significantly at any other times throughout the study. The PFR one hour post-load (PFR-1) was the strongest (P less than .003) predictor of outcome.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) Study Objective: To determine the efficacy of intravenous aminophylline in the treatment of patients hospitalized for exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial during the first 72 hours of hospitalization. Patients: Thirty patients admitted from the emergency room or walk-in clinic with the primary diagnosis of an exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Twenty-eight patients completed the study; 2 patients, 1 receiving placebo and 1 receiving aminophylline, were removed from the study because of respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation. Interventions: Patients received either intravenous aminophylline or placebo, in addition to nebulized, inhaled 0.3 mL of a 5% solution every 6 hours; methylprednisolone, 0.5 mg/kg body weight every 6 hours intravenously; ampicillin, 500 mg orally every 6 hours (tetracycline or trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole were substituted in penicillin-allergic patients); and supplemental oxygen as needed. Aminophylline infusion rates were adjusted by an unblinded investigator to achieve theophylline levels of 72 to 83 mumol/L. Changes were also made in placebo infusion rates to maintain the double-blind design. Measurements and Main Results: The forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and forced vital capacity (FVC) before and after metaproterenol inhalation were measured twice daily by a blinded investigator, who also administered a verbal dyspnea index with a scale of 1 to 10 and questioned patients regarding possible side effects of treatment (tremor, palpitations, nausea, or vomiting). Arterial blood gas measurements at 72 hours were compared with those obtained on admission. Significant improvements in FEV1 and FVC measured before and after metaproterenol treatment and in dyspnea occurred over time in both treatment groups (p less than 0.05 for all measurements). However, there were no significant differences between the placebo and aminophylline groups in any of the spirometric measurements or the dyspnea indices (p greater than 0.5 in all five analyses). The mean increases (+/- SE) in Po2 of 1.9 (+/- 0.5) kPa with placebo and 1.7 (+/- 0.7) kPa with aminophylline and the mean decreases in PCO2 of 0.5 (+/- 0.4) kPa with placebo and 1.2 (+/- 0.4) kPa with aminophylline were not significantly different (p greater than 0.6 for PO2, p greater than 0.2 for PCO2).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS) The incidence of acute renal failure (ARF) after cardiac surgery remains high, despite improvements in surgical techniques and perioperative care, and is associated with an unacceptably high mortality. The adenosine receptor antagonist theophylline has been shown to confer some benefit in experimental and clinical ARF due to ischaemia, contrast media and various nephrotoxic agents.
                In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, the effectiveness of theophylline for prevention of renal impairment after elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was evaluated. Fifty-six patients with normal renal function received a bolus of 4 mg/kg and a subsequent continuous infusion of 0.25 mg/kg/h theophylline (n=28) or isotonic saline (n=28) for up to 96 h. Serum creatinine concentrations were measured preoperatively and daily until day 5 after surgery, and the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) ([(51)Cr]EDTA-clearance) was determined preoperatively, and at days 1, 3 and 5 after surgery.
                Serum creatinine and GFR were the same in both groups. The number of patients with increases of serum creatinine > or =0.4 mg/dl were five in the theophylline group and four in the placebo group. Volumes of infused fluid and urine volumes were not different between groups, both ranging from approximately 7.5 to 8 l during the first 24 h after surgery. The number of patients with termination of study medication due to presumed side effects was not different between placebo and theophylline groups.
                Theophylline administration for renal protection after CABG appears to be ineffective in a pilot study in well-hydrated patients. However, the statistical power of our study was not sufficient to exclude a possible protective effect of theophylline. The present study demonstrated the feasability of a larger trial with theophylline or one of the new specific adenosine A1 receptor antagonists in the setting of ARF after cardiac surgery. Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and theophylline have been reported to decrease the elevated hemoglobin (Hgb) and hematocrit (Hct) levels in the renal transplant recipients with erythrocytosis. We conducted a prospective randomized, open labeled, crossover trial with theophylline, and an ACEI, fosinopril in nine stable renal transplant recipients with erythrocytosis. Aim of the study was to determine and compare the efficacy of these medications in stable renal transplant patients. At three months, compared to baseline, fosinopril significantly reduced the elevated hemoglobin (Hgb 17.2 +/- 0.6 vs. 14.9 +/- 1.4 gm/dL, p = 0.0023), and hematocrit levels (Hct 51.3 +/- 2.4 vs. 43.7 +/- 4.6%, p = 0.003). In contrast theophylline therapy was associated with a non-significant rise in hemoglobin (17.4 +/- 0.7 vs. 18.1 +/- 0.9gm/dL, p > 0.05) and hematocrit (52.4 +/- 2.7 vs. 54.7 +/- 3.9%, p > 0.05). With fosinopril compared to theophylline, there was a significant difference in the change in hemoglobin (baseline to three months 2.8 +/- 1.7 vs. -0.7 +/- 0.69 gm/dL respectively, p = 0.017), and the change in hematocrit (baseline to three months 9 +/- 6 vs. -2.3 +/- 2.7% respectively, p = 0.027). Four patients (44.4%) did not tolerate theophylline and did not complete the theophylline arm. To conclude, in our study, fosinopril effectively decreased the elevated hemoglobin and hematocrit in patients with post transplant erythrocytosis, and was superior to theophylline, while theophylline was ineffective and poorly tolerated in this condition. To assess the role of aminophylline in the treatment of acute exacerbations of bronchospastic disease when used in addition to inhaled beta-agonists and intravenous corticosteroids.
                Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled intervention study.
                One hundred thirty-three adult patients with either asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who presented to the emergency department with asthma or wheezing.
                All patients received therapy with both aerosolized metaproterenol and intravenous methyl-prednisolone. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either a loading dose of aminophylline followed by a routine infusion (n = 65) or an equal volume of placebo as a loading dose and infusion (n = 68).
                At discharge from the emergency department, the median serum theophylline concentration for the aminophylline group was 54 mumol/L (9.7 mg/L). The two groups showed no differences (P greater than 0.2) in measurements of forced expiratory volume at 1 second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), or peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) at baseline or at 60 or 120 minutes after aminophylline administration. Neither patient satisfaction nor physician assessment of response to therapy differed between the two groups. There was no difference (P greater than 0.2) in the frequency of side effects, except for a trend toward a higher frequency of nausea (P = 0.13) in the aminophylline group. There was, however, a threefold decrease in the hospital admission rate for patients treated with aminophylline (6%) compared with placebo recipients (21%) (P = 0.016).
                Aminophylline, in doses producing levels just below the commonly accepted therapeutic range, appears to decrease hospital admissions in patients with acute exacerbation of asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This finding, if confirmed in larger studies, may represent a substantial cost savings. We studied 40 patients with acute exacerbations of asthma to determine the efficacy of a 3-h intravenous infusion of aminophylline in patients who were already being treated with an inhaled beta-adrenergic agonist (metaproterenol). Each patient was treated with inhaled metaproterenol at hourly intervals for 3 h. In addition, patients were randomly assigned to therapy with either intravenous aminophylline or placebo. Neither the patient nor the house officers and nurses caring for the patient knew whether aminophylline or placebo was given. The FEV1 improved continually throughout the study to a similar extent in both treatment groups, but the patients treated with aminophylline had significantly more adverse effects (p less than 0.025, Mann-Whitney). There was no apparent benefit from aminophylline even in patients who presented to the emergency room with severe airway obstruction (FEV1 less than 0.8L) or with plasma theophylline levels less than 10 mg/L. We conclude that intravenous aminophylline adds to the toxicity but not the efficacy of inhaled metaproterenol in the treatment of acute exacerbations of asthma.
There is not enough evidence to assess whether theophylline or its analogues, e.g. aminophylline, are safe and improve outcome in people with acute ischaemic stroke.