11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Update of the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia in the ICU

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In accordance with the recommendations of, amongst others, the Surviving Sepsis Campaign and the recently published European treatment guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), in the event of a patient with such infections, empirical antibiotic treatment must be appropriate and administered as early as possible. The aim of this manuscript is to update treatment protocols by reviewing recently published studies on the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia in the critically ill patients that require invasive respiratory support and patients with HAP from hospital wards that require invasive mechanical ventilation. An interdisciplinary group of experts, comprising specialists in anaesthesia and resuscitation and in intensive care medicine, updated the epidemiology and antimicrobial resistance and established clinical management priorities based on patients’ risk factors. Implementation of rapid diagnostic microbiological techniques available and the new antibiotics recently added to the therapeutic arsenal has been reviewed and updated. After analysis of the categories outlined, some recommendations were suggested, and an algorithm to update empirical and targeted treatment in critically ill patients has also been designed. These aspects are key to improve VAP outcomes because of the severity of patients and possible acquisition of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs).

          Related collections

          Most cited references70

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Epidemiology and outcomes of health-care-associated pneumonia: results from a large US database of culture-positive pneumonia.

          Traditionally, pneumonia developing in patients outside the hospital is categorized as community acquired, even if these patients have been receiving health care in an outpatient facility. Accumulating evidence suggests that health-care-associated infections are distinct from those that are truly community acquired. To characterize the microbiology and outcomes among patients with culture-positive community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), health-care-associated pneumonia (HCAP), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). A retrospective cohort study based on a large US inpatient database. A total of 4,543 patients with culture-positive pneumonia admitted into 59 US hospitals between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2003, and recorded in a large, multi-institutional database of US acute-care hospitals (Cardinal Health-Atlas Research Database; Cardinal Health Clinical Knowledge Services; Marlborough, MA). Culture data (respiratory and blood), in-hospital mortality, length of hospital stay (LOS), and billed hospital charges. Approximately one half of hospitalized patients with pneumonia had CAP, and > 20% had HCAP. Staphylococcus aureus was a major pathogen in all pneumonia types, with its occurrence markedly higher in the non-CAP groups than in the CAP group. Mortality rates associated with HCAP (19.8%) and HAP (18.8%) were comparable (p > 0.05), and both were significantly higher than that for CAP (10%, all p < 0.0001) and lower than that for VAP (29.3%, all p < 0.0001). Mean LOS varied significantly with pneumonia category (in order of ascending values: CAP, HCAP, HAP, and VAP; all p < 0.0001). Similarly, mean hospital charge varied significantly with pneumonia category (in order of ascending value: CAP, HCAP, HAP, and VAP; all p < 0.0001). The present analysis justified HCAP as a new category of pneumonia. S aureus was a major pathogen of all pneumonias with higher rates in non-CAP pneumonias. Compared with CAP, non-CAP was associated with more severe disease, higher mortality rate, greater LOS, and increased cost.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Linezolid in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia: a randomized, controlled study.

            Post hoc analyses of clinical trial data suggested that linezolid may be more effective than vancomycin for treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nosocomial pneumonia. This study prospectively assessed efficacy and safety of linezolid, compared with a dose-optimized vancomycin regimen, for treatment of MRSA nosocomial pneumonia. This was a prospective, double-blind, controlled, multicenter trial involving hospitalized adult patients with hospital-acquired or healthcare-associated MRSA pneumonia. Patients were randomized to receive intravenous linezolid (600 mg every 12 hours) or vancomycin (15 mg/kg every 12 hours) for 7-14 days. Vancomycin dose was adjusted on the basis of trough levels. The primary end point was clinical outcome at end of study (EOS) in evaluable per-protocol (PP) patients. Prespecified secondary end points included response in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population at end of treatment (EOT) and EOS and microbiologic response in the PP and mITT populations at EOT and EOS. Survival and safety were also evaluated. Of 1184 patients treated, 448 (linezolid, n = 224; vancomycin, n = 224) were included in the mITT and 348 (linezolid, n = 172; vancomycin, n = 176) in the PP population. In the PP population, 95 (57.6%) of 165 linezolid-treated patients and 81 (46.6%) of 174 vancomycin-treated patients achieved clinical success at EOS (95% confidence interval for difference, 0.5%-21.6%; P = .042). All-cause 60-day mortality was similar (linezolid, 15.7%; vancomycin, 17.0%), as was incidence of adverse events. Nephrotoxicity occurred more frequently with vancomycin (18.2%; linezolid, 8.4%). For the treatment of MRSA nosocomial pneumonia, clinical response at EOS in the PP population was significantly higher with linezolid than with vancomycin, although 60-day mortality was similar.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Ceftazidime-avibactam versus meropenem in nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia (REPROVE): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority trial

              Nosocomial pneumonia is commonly associated with antimicrobial-resistant Gram-negative pathogens. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in patients with nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia, compared with meropenem in a multinational, phase 3, double-blind, non-inferiority trial (REPROVE).
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                zaragoza_raf@gva.es
                Journal
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                29 June 2020
                29 June 2020
                2020
                : 24
                : 383
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.411289.7, ISNI 0000 0004 1770 9825, Critical Care Department, , Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, ; Valencia, Spain
                [2 ]Fundación Micellium, Valencia, Spain
                [3 ]ICU, Hospital Universitario Ourense, Ourense, Spain
                [4 ]GRID grid.411308.f, SICU, , Hospital Clínico Universitario Valencia, ; Valencia, Spain
                [5 ]ICU, Hospital Universitario Son Llázter, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
                [6 ]GRID grid.7080.f, Department of Medicine, , Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), ; Barcelona, Spain
                [7 ]GRID grid.428313.f, ISNI 0000 0000 9238 6887, Critical Care Department, , Corporació Sanitària Parc Taulí, Sabadell, ; Barcelona, Spain
                [8 ]GRID grid.413448.e, ISNI 0000 0000 9314 1427, CIBERES Ciber de Enfermedades Respiratorias, ; Madrid, Spain
                [9 ]GRID grid.411083.f, ISNI 0000 0001 0675 8654, ICU, , Hospital Vall d’Hebrón, ; Barcelona, Spain
                [10 ]GRID grid.81821.32, ISNI 0000 0000 8970 9163, SICU, , Hospital Universitario La Paz, ; Madrid, Spain
                [11 ]GRID grid.411068.a, ISNI 0000 0001 0671 5785, ICU, , Hospital Clínico Universitario San Carlos, ; Madrid, Spain
                [12 ]GRID grid.84393.35, ISNI 0000 0001 0360 9602, ICU, , Hospital Universitari I Politecnic La Fe, ; Valencia, Spain
                [13 ]GRID grid.411435.6, ISNI 0000 0004 1767 4677, ICU, , Hospital Universitari Joan XXIII, ; Tarragona, Spain
                [14 ]GRID grid.411347.4, ISNI 0000 0000 9248 5770, ICU, , Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, ; Madrid, Spain
                [15 ]GRID grid.416409.e, ISNI 0000 0004 0617 8280, ICU, , Trinity Centre for Health Science HRB-Wellcome Trust, St James’s Hospital, ; Dublin, Ireland
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6593-5486
                Article
                3091
                10.1186/s13054-020-03091-2
                7322703
                32600375
                c6e66d35-2f46-4129-b076-21e0caadd303
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 2 March 2020
                : 12 June 2020
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                hap,vap,nosocomial pneumonia,ceftolozane-tazobactam,ceftazidime-avibactam,pseudomonas aeruginosa,kpc,pcr

                Comments

                Comment on this article