ABSTRACT
Patients with chronic cough experience major alteration in their quality of life. Given its numerous etiologies and treatments, this disease is a complex entity. To help clinicians involved in patient management of patients, guidelines have been issued by a group of French experts. They address definitions of chronic cough and initial management of patients with this pathology. We present herein the second-line tests that might be considered in patients whose coughing has persisted, notwithstanding initial management. The experts have also put forward a definition of unexplained or refractory chronic cough (URCC), the objective being to more precisely identify those patients whose cough persists despite optimal management. Lastly, these guidelines indicate the pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions of use in URCC. Amitriptyline, pregabalin, gabapentin or morphine combined with speech and/or physical therapy are mainstays in treatment strategies. Other treatment options, such as P2X3 antagonists, are being developed and have generated high hopes among physicians and patients alike.
Subject(s)
Cough , Quality of Life , Humans , Adult , Cough/diagnosis , Cough/etiology , Cough/therapy , Chronic Disease , Gabapentin/therapeutic use , Amitriptyline/therapeutic useABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The impact of fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) on the management of chronic cough (CC) is still inconclusive. The aim of the present study was to assess whether FENO is a good tool to predict the response to inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in patients with CC. METHODS: Patients, referred for investigation of CC, had a FENO measurement determined as part of their first-line assessment. A methacholine test was performed as part of a second-line assessement. Patients were assigned to two groups according to their FENO values: a high FENO level group (â°¥25 ppb) and a normal FENO level group (<25 ppb). RESULTS: One hundred patients were included in the study. High FENO levels were found in 25 patients (25%). The proportion of patients who responded to ICS was significantly greater in the high FENO group compared to the normal FENO level group (86.4% vs 46.3%, P<0.05). FENO is a good tool to predict ICS response in patients with high FENO levels but a response to ICS cannot be ruled out in patients with normal FENO levels. In patients with normal FENO values, a methacholine test could be an interesting tool for a second-line assessment. Among the 13 patients with a positive methacholine test result, 11 responded to ICS whilst 2 did not. Of the patients with a negative methacholine test result, 3 responded to ICS whilst 13 did not. CONCLUSION: FENO may be a more reliable predictor of ICS response when used as part of a multi-step assessment procedure.
