Aspiration Risk Factors, Microbiology, and Empiric Antibiotics for Patients Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

2021-01

Authors

Marin-Corral, Judith
Pascual-Guardia, Sergi
Amati, Francesco
Aliberti, Stefano
Masclans, Joan R
Soni, Nilam
Rodriguez, Alejandro
Sibila, Oriol
Sanz, Francisco
Sotgiu, Giovanni

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Citation Stats

Attention Stats

Abstract

Background

Aspiration community-acquired pneumonia (ACAP) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients with aspiration risk factors (AspRFs) are infections associated with anaerobes, but limited evidence suggests their pathogenic role.

Research question

What are the aspiration risk factors, microbiology patterns, and empiric anti-anaerobic use in patients hospitalized with CAP?

Study design and methods

This is a secondary analysis of GLIMP, an international, multicenter, point-prevalence study of adults hospitalized with CAP. Patients were stratified into three groups: (1) ACAP, (2) CAP/AspRF+ (CAP with AspRF), and (3) CAP/AspRF- (CAP without AspRF). Data on demographics, comorbidities, microbiological results, and anti-anaerobic antibiotics were analyzed in all groups. Patients were further stratified in severe and nonsevere CAP groups.

Results

We enrolled 2,606 patients with CAP, of which 193 (7.4%) had ACAP. Risk factors independently associated with ACAP were male, bedridden, underweight, a nursing home resident, and having a history of stroke, dementia, mental illness, and enteral tube feeding. Among non-ACAP patients, 1,709 (70.8%) had CAP/AspRF+ and 704 (29.2%) had CAP/AspRF-. Microbiology patterns including anaerobes were similar between CAP/AspRF-, CAP/AspRF+ and ACAP (0.0% vs 1.03% vs 1.64%). Patients with severe ACAP had higher rates of total gram-negative bacteria (64.3% vs 44.3% vs 33.3%, P = .021) and lower rates of total gram-positive bacteria (7.1% vs 38.1% vs 50.0%, P < .001) when compared with patients with severe CAP/AspRF+ and severe CAP/AspRF-, respectively. Most patients (>50% in all groups) independent of AspRFs or ACAP received specific or broad-spectrum anti-anaerobic coverage antibiotics.

Interpretation

Hospitalized patients with ACAP or CAP/AspRF+ had similar anaerobic flora compared with patients without aspiration risk factors. Gram-negative bacteria were more prevalent in patients with severe ACAP. Despite having similar microbiological flora between groups, a large proportion of CAP patients received anti-anaerobic antibiotic coverage.

Type

Journal article

Department

Description

Provenance

Subjects

GLIMP investigators, Humans, Community-Acquired Infections, Anti-Bacterial Agents, Hospitalization, Risk Factors, Cohort Studies, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Middle Aged, Female, Male, Respiratory Aspiration

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.1016/j.chest.2020.06.079

Publication Info

Marin-Corral, Judith, Sergi Pascual-Guardia, Francesco Amati, Stefano Aliberti, Joan R Masclans, Nilam Soni, Alejandro Rodriguez, Oriol Sibila, et al. (2021). Aspiration Risk Factors, Microbiology, and Empiric Antibiotics for Patients Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia. Chest, 159(1). pp. 58–72. 10.1016/j.chest.2020.06.079 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/29836.

This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.


Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.