Loading...
3 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
- Burden of Community-Acquired Pneumonia and Unmet Clinical NeedsPublication . Ferreira-Coimbra, João; Sarda, Cristina; Rello, JordiCommunity-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is the leading cause of death among infectious diseases and an important health problem, having considerable implications for healthcare systems worldwide. Despite important advances in prevention through vaccines, new rapid diagnostic tests and antibiotics, CAP management still has significant drawbacks. Mortality remains very high in severely ill patients presenting with respiratory failure or shock but is also high in the elderly. Even after a CAP episode, higher risk of death remains during a long period, a risk mainly driven by inflammation and patient-related co-morbidities. CAP microbiology has been altered by new molecular diagnostic tests that have turned viruses into the most identified pathogens, notwithstanding uncertainties about the specific role of each virus in CAP pathogenesis. Pneumococcal vaccines also impacted CAP etiology and thus had changed Streptococcus pneumoniae circulating serotypes. Pathogens from specific regions should also be kept in mind when treating CAP. New antibiotics for CAP treatment were not tested in severely ill patients and focused on multidrug-resistant pathogens that are unrelated to CAP, limiting their general use and indications for intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Similarly, CAP management could be personalized through the use of adjunctive therapies that showed outcome improvements in particular patient groups. Although pneumococcal vaccination was only convincingly shown to reduce invasive pneumococcal disease, with a less significant effect in pneumococcal CAP, it remains the best therapeutic intervention to prevent bacterial CAP. Further research in CAP is needed to reduce its population impact and improve individual outcomes.
- Ventilator-associated pneumonia diagnosis: a prioritization exercise based on multi-criteria decision analysisPublication . Ferreira-Coimbra, João; Ardanuy, Carmen; Diaz, Emili; Leone, Marc; De Pascale, Gennaro; Póvoa, Pedro; Prat-Aymerich, Cristina; Serrano-Garcia, Ricardo; Solé-Violan, Jordi; Zaragoza, Rafael; Rello, JordiThe aim was to provide global experts ranking on priorities in diagnostic tools for VAP in clinical practice. A multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) was performed to identify diagnosis tools for VAP diagnosis. Priority factors were identified after literature review. An international, multidisciplinary expert panel reviewed variables and ranked diagnostic tools. Experts from ten European hospitals participated. Regarding bedside clinical practices, seven required chest X-ray use in all patients, whereas six reported the use of blood cultures and endotracheal aspirate in all patients. Invasive techniques were routinely performed in seven sites. CRP, PCT, and Gram stains were performed in all patients by 5, 2, and 8, respectively. Impact on patient outcomes, safety, and impact on the decision to start antibiotic therapy were ranked as the top three relevant concerns (7.7/10, 7/10, and 6.9/10, respectively). Chest X-ray was ranked as the most important imaging technique to diagnose VAP (score 251.7). Apart from blood cultures, endotracheal aspirate culture was identified as the main collection method for the microbiological testing (scores of 274.8 and 246.8, respectively). Mini-BAL was the preferred invasive technique with a score of 208. Top three biomarkers were CRP (score 184.3), PCT (181.3), and WBC (166.4). Gram stain (192.5) was prioritized among laboratory diagnostic techniques. Using MCDA, it is recommended to perform a combination of diagnostic techniques including images (chest X-ray), culture of clinical specimens (blood cultures and endotracheal aspirate), and biomarkers (CRP or PCT) for VAP diagnosis at the bedside. Gram stain was ranked as the preferred laboratory technique.
- Evidence supporting recommendations from international guidelines on treatment, diagnosis, and prevention of HAP and VAP in adultsPublication . Campogiani, Laura; Tejada, Sofia; Ferreira-Coimbra, João; Restrepo, Marcos I.; Rello, JordiClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are intended to support clinical decisions and should be based on high-quality evidence. The objective of the study was to evaluate the quality of evidence supporting the recommendations issued in CPGs for therapy, diagnosis, and prevention of hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP). CPGs released by international scientific societies after year 2000, using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology, were analyzed. Number and strength of recommendations and quality of evidence (high, moderate, low, and very low) were extracted and indexed in the aforementioned sections. High-quality evidence was based on randomized control trials (RCT) without important limitations and exceptionally on rigorous observational studies. Eighty recommendations were assessed, with 7 (8.7%), 24 (30.0%), 29 (36.3%), and 20 (25.0%) being supported by high, moderate, low, and very low-quality evidence, respectively. Highest evidence degree was reported for 26 prevention recommendations, with 7 (26.9%) supported by high-quality evidence and no recommendation based on very low-quality evidence. In contrast, among 9 recommendations for diagnosis and 45 for therapy, none was supported by high-quality evidence, in spite of being recommended as strong in 33.3% and 46.7%, respectively. Among HAP/VAP diagnosis recommendations, the majority of evidence was rated as low or very low-quality (55.6% and 22.2%, respectively) whereas among HAP/VAP therapy recommendations, 4/5 were rated as low and very low-quality (40% each). In conclusion, among HAP/VAP international guidelines, most recommendations, particularly in therapy, remain supported by observational studies, case reports, and expert opinion. Well-designed RCTs are urgently needed.