The 2020 Focused Updates to the Asthma Management Guidelines: A Report from the National Asthma Education and Prevention Program Coordinating Committee Expert Panel Working Group was coordinated and supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health. It is designed to improve patient care and support informed decision making about asthma management in the clinical setting. This update addresses six priority topic areas as determined by the state of the science at the time of a needs assessment, and input from multiple stakeholders: Fractional Exhaled Nitric Oxide Testing Indoor Allergen Mitigation Intermittent Inhaled Corticosteroids Long-Acting Muscarinic Antagonists Immunotherapy in the Treatment of Allergic Asthma Bronchial Thermoplasty A rigorous process was undertaken to develop these evidence-based guidelines. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality’s (AHRQ) Evidence-Based Practice Centers conducted systematic reviews on these topics, which were used by the Expert Panel Working Group as a basis for developing recommendations and guidance. The Expert Panel used GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation), an internationally accepted framework, in consultation with an experienced methodology team for determining the certainty of evidence and the direction and strength of recommendations based on the evidence. Practical implementation guidance for each recommendation incorporates findings from NHLBI-led patient, caregiver, and clinician focus groups. To assist clincians in implementing these recommendations into patient care, the new recommendations have been integrated into the existing Expert Panel Report-3 (EPR-3) asthma management step diagram format.

Grading the strength of recommendations and the quality of underlying evidence enhances the usefulness of clinical practice guidelines. Professional societies and other organizations, including the American Thoracic Society (ATS), should reach consensus about whether they will use one common grading system and which of the numerous grading systems they would apply across all guidelines. The profusion of guideline grading systems confuses consumers of guidelines, and undermines the value of the grading exercise in conveying a transparent message. In response to this dilemma, the international GRADE working group has developed an approach that is useful for many guideline contexts, and that several national and international organizations have adopted. The GRADE system classifies recommendations as strong or weak, according to the balance of the benefits and downsides (harms, burden, and cost) after considering the quality of evidence. The quality of evidence reflects the confidence in estimates of the true effects of an intervention, and the system classifies quality of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low according to factors that include the study methodology, the consistency and precision of the results, and the directness of the evidence. On recommendation of the ATS Documents Development and Implementation Committee, the ATS adopted the GRADE approach for its guidelines in line with many other organizations that have recently chosen the GRADE approach. This article informs ATS guideline developers, investigators, and those interpreting future ATS guidelines that follow the GRADE approach about the methodology and applicability of ATS guidelines and recommendations.

Objective. Pulmonary arterial hypertension related to scleroderma (PAH-Scl) is associated with high morbidity and mortality as well as poorer response to therapy and worse outcomes compared with the idiopathic form of PAH (IPAH). Scleroderma is an autoimmune disease that can affect left and right heart function directly through inflammation and fibrosis and indirectly through systemic and pulmonary hypertension. This study tested the hypothesis that an increased prevalence of left heart disease might explain the higher mortality in patients with PAH-Scl compared with patients with IPAH.Methods. The study was designed as a retrospective cohort study comparing the baseline clinical data from 91 consecutive patients (41 with IPAH and 50 with PAH-Scl). Cox proportional hazards models were used to predict the effect of clinical covariates on patient survival.Results. Patients with PAH-Scl had a lower mean pulmonary artery pressure (46.6 mm Hg versus 54.4 mm Hg in patients with IPAH; P ‫؍‬ 0.002) despite similar levels of cardiac dysfunction (cardiac index 2.2 and 2.1 liters/minute/m 2 , respectively; P ‫؍‬ 0.19). Echocardiography revealed similar degrees of right ventricular dysfunction in the 2 groups, whereas a predominance of left heart dysfunction was observed in patients with PAH-Scl. One-and three-year survival estimates were 87.8% and 48.9%, respectively, in patients with PAH-Scl and 95.1% and 83.6%, respectively, in those with IPAH. Patients with PAH-Scl were 3.06 times more likely to die than were patients with IPAH, after controlling for the presence of pericardial effusion; there was no significant change in increased risk of death in PAH-Scl after controlling for left heart disease.Conclusion. The results confirm that there are significant clinical and survival differences between IPAH and PAH-Scl. The presence of left heart disease, although more common in PAH-Scl, was not predictive of the higher mortality in these patients.

Rationale: The patterns and outcomes of noninvasive, positivepressure ventilation (NIPPV) use in patients hospitalized for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) nationwide are unknown. Objectives: To determine the prevalence and trends of noninvasive ventilation for acute COPD. Methods: We used data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample to assess the pattern and outcomes of NIPPV use for acute exacerbations of COPD from 1998 to 2008. Measurements and Main Results: An estimated 7,511,267 admissions for acute exacerbations occurred from 1998 to 2008. There was a 462% increase in NIPPV use (from 1.0 to 4.5% of all admissions) and a 42% decline in invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) use (from 6.0 to 3.5% of all admissions) during these years. This was accompanied by an increase in the size of a small cohort of patients requiring transition from NIPPV to IMV. In-hospital mortality in this group appeared to be worsening over time. By 2008, these patients had a high mortality rate (29.3%), which represented 61% higher odds of death compared with patients directly placed on IMV (95% confidence interval, 24-109%) and 677% greater odds of death compared with patients treated with NIPPV alone (95% confidence interval, 475-948%). With the exception of patients transitioned from NIPPV to IMV, in-hospital outcomes were favorable and improved steadily year by year. Conclusions: The use of NIPPV has increased significantly over time among patients hospitalized for acute exacerbations of COPD, whereas the need for intubation and in-hospital mortality has declined. However, the rising mortality rate in a small but expanding group of patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation after treatment with noninvasive ventilation needs further investigation.Keywords: COPD; positive-pressure ventilation; artificial respiration; epidemiology Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the fourth leading cause of death in the United States and is projected to become the third leading cause of death by 2020 (1, 2). A large proportion of morbidity and mortality from COPD results from acute exacerbations, which lead to 1.5 million emergency room visits and 750,000 hospitalizations annually in the United States (3, 4). Therefore, to improve outcomes and reduce mortality due to COPD, we need to optimize the management of acute exacerbations (5), including the correct use of respiratory support modalities to treat patients with respiratory failure.Over the last decade, noninvasive, positive-pressure ventilation (NIPPV) has started playing an increasingly important role in the treatment of respiratory failure due to acute exacerbations (6-12). This is because clinical trials demonstrate good efficacy for NIPPV in reducing risk of intubation and mortality, health care providers are becoming increasingly confident with its use, and unlike IMV, it can be implemented outside the ICU, freeing up ICU beds. Therefore, it appears likely that NIPPV use will continue to increa...