Blot F, Raynard B, Chachaty E, Tancrède C, Antoun S, Nitenberg G
Intensive Care Unit, Microbiology Laboratory, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000 Nov;162(5):1731-7. doi: 10.1164/ajrccm.162.5.9908088.
Except for bronchoalveolar lavage, the value of the Gram stain examination of respiratory tract samples for the diagnosis of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and their potential impact on empiric antibiotic treatment have rarely been assessed. During a 14-mo period, both plugged telescoping catheter (PTC) and endotracheal aspirate (EA) were performed when an HAP was suspected in mechanically ventilated patients. The results of Gram stain examinations and cultures and previous and subsequent antibiotic treatment were prospectively recorded. Two criteria for pneumonia were considered: (1) clinically diagnosed pneumonia, according to attending physicians, based on clinical and radiological evolution and the PTC culture results, and (2) microbiologically proven pneumonia (solely based on the result of quantitative PTC culture). Of 91 episodes of suspected HAP in 51 patients, 27 (30%) episodes were clinically diagnosed as pneumonia. When considering clinically diagnosed pneumonia, the sensitivity and specificity of Gram stain examination were similar (respectively, 89% and 62% for EA and 67% and 95% for PTC). When considering microbiologically proven pneumonia, the sensitivity and specificity of Gram stain examination were, respectively, 91% and 64% for EA and 70% and 96% for PTC. The negative predictive value of Gram stain examination of EA and the positive predictive value of Gram stain examination of PTC were high. Our results suggest that the combination of Gram stain examination of paired PTC and EA may contribute to the early diagnosis of HAP in about two-thirds of mechanically ventilated patients, and guide the empiric therapy when needed. In the remaining one-third of patients, the Gram stain examination is not helpful in predicting HAP.
除支气管肺泡灌洗外,呼吸道样本革兰氏染色检查对医院获得性肺炎(HAP)诊断的价值及其对经验性抗生素治疗的潜在影响鲜有评估。在14个月期间,当怀疑机械通气患者发生HAP时,同时进行了插入式伸缩导管(PTC)采样和气管内抽吸物(EA)采样。前瞻性记录革兰氏染色检查和培养结果以及之前和之后的抗生素治疗情况。考虑了两个肺炎诊断标准:(1)根据主治医生的判断,基于临床和影像学演变以及PTC培养结果进行临床诊断的肺炎;(2)微生物学证实的肺炎(仅基于定量PTC培养结果)。在51例患者的91次疑似HAP发作中,27次(30%)发作被临床诊断为肺炎。在考虑临床诊断的肺炎时,革兰氏染色检查的敏感性和特异性相似(EA的敏感性和特异性分别为89%和62%,PTC的敏感性和特异性分别为67%和95%)。在考虑微生物学证实的肺炎时,EA革兰氏染色检查的敏感性和特异性分别为91%和64%,PTC革兰氏染色检查 的敏感性和特异性分别为70%和96%。EA革兰氏染色检查的阴性预测值和PTC革兰氏染色检查的阳性预测值较高。我们的结果表明,配对的PTC和EA革兰氏染色检查相结合可能有助于约三分之二机械通气患者HAP的早期诊断,并在需要时指导经验性治疗。在其余三分之一的患者中,革兰氏染色检查对预测HAP没有帮助。