Ewig S, Schäfer H, Torres A
Dept of Medicine II, Cardiology and Pneumology, Bonn, Germany.
Eur Respir J. 2000 Dec;16(6):1193-201. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-3003.2000.16f27.x.
In current guidelines for the management of adults with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), the triaging decision about hospitalization or intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and, as a consequence, selection of initial antimicrobial treatment is largely based on the assessment of pneumonia severity. The proposed severity criteria are mainly derived from studies determining predictors of adverse outcome. These include age, male sex, comorbidity, acute respiratory failure, severe sepsis and septic shock, extension of radiographic infiltrates, bacteraemia and CAP through several different pathogens such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus, Gram-negative enteric bacilli (GNEB), and signs of disease progression within the first 48-72 h. In addition, prediction rules and need for a complicated course in ambulatory and hospitalized patients, for the individual risk of death have been developed which may be helpful in determining the patient who might require hospitalization or intensive care, respectively. Risk classifications such as the scores developed by FINE et al. [40] are not only useful for identifying low risk patients who might safely be treated as outpatients, but apparently they will also play a major role in the evaluation of processes and outcomes of care for patients with CAP. Recent investigations have provided objective criteria for the definition of severe CAP requiring ICU admission. Whether the detection of infiltrates in the chest radiographs of patients with acute lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) suggestive of mild pneumonia has an independent prognostic impact which fundamentally affects the concept of mild LRTI remains to be seen. Based on objective criteria for severity assessment it will be possible to define interventions aimed at reducing hospital admission rates, define a risk-adapted antimicrobial treatment regimen, reduce costs for antimicrobial treatment and supportive measures, shorten hospital stay, and, thereby, improve the quality of care for patients with community-acquired pneumonia.
在当前成人社区获得性肺炎(CAP)管理指南中,关于住院或入住重症监护病房(ICU)的分诊决策,以及由此而来的初始抗菌治疗选择,很大程度上基于对肺炎严重程度的评估。所提出的严重程度标准主要源自确定不良结局预测因素的研究。这些因素包括年龄、男性、合并症、急性呼吸衰竭、严重脓毒症和感染性休克、影像学浸润范围、菌血症以及由几种不同病原体(如肺炎链球菌、金黄色葡萄球菌、革兰氏阴性肠道杆菌(GNEB))引起的CAP,以及最初48 - 72小时内的疾病进展迹象。此外,还制定了预测规则以及门诊和住院患者复杂病程及个体死亡风险的评估方法,这可能分别有助于确定可能需要住院或重症监护的患者。诸如FINE等人[40]制定的评分等风险分类不仅有助于识别可安全作为门诊患者治疗的低风险患者,显然它们在评估CAP患者的治疗过程和结局中也将发挥重要作用。最近的研究为定义需要入住ICU的重症CAP提供了客观标准。急性下呼吸道感染(LRTI)患者胸部X线片上提示轻度肺炎的浸润影检测是否具有独立的预后影响,从而从根本上影响轻度LRTI的概念,仍有待观察。基于严重程度评估的客观标准,将有可能确定旨在降低住院率的干预措施,确定风险适应性抗菌治疗方案,降低抗菌治疗和支持措施的成本,缩短住院时间,从而提高社区获得性肺炎患者的护理质量。