Thoraxzentrum Ruhrgebiet, Kliniken für Pneumologie und Infektiologie, Evangelisches Krankenhaus Herne und Augusta-Kranken-Anstalt Bochum, Bergstrasse 26, 44791 Bochum, Germany.
Intensive Care Med. 2011 Feb;37(2):214-23. doi: 10.1007/s00134-010-2077-0. Epub 2010 Nov 16.
Four different rules have been suggested and validated for intensive care unit (ICU) admission for community-acquired pneumonia: modified American Thoracic Society (ATS) rule, Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)/ATS rule, España rule, and SMART-COP. Their performance varies, with sensitivity of around 70% and specificity of around 80-90%. Only negative predictive values are consistently high. Critical methodological issues include the appropriate reference for derivation, the populations studied, the variables included, and the time course of pneumonia. Severe community-acquired pneumonia (SCAP) may evolve because of acute respiratory failure or/and severe sepsis/septic shock. Pneumonia-related complications and decompensated comorbidities may be additional or independent reasons for a severe course. All variables included in predictive rules relate to the two principal reasons for SCAP. However, taken as major criteria, they are of little value for clinical assessment. Instead, a limited set of minor criteria reflecting severity seems appropriate. However, predictive rules may not meet principal needs of severity assessment because of failure in sensitivity, ignorance of the potential contribution of complications or decompensated comorbidity to pneumonia severity, and poor sensitivity for the lower extreme in the spectrum of severe pneumonia, i.e., patients at risk of SCAP. We therefore advocate an approach that refers to the evaluation of the need for intensified treatment rather than ICU, based on a set of minor criteria and sensitive to the dynamic nature of pneumonia. Intensified treatment such as monitoring and treatment of acute respiratory failure or/and severe sepsis/septic shock is thought to improve management and possibly outcomes by setting the focus on both patients with severity criteria at admission and those at risk for SCAP.
四种不同的规则已被提出并验证可用于社区获得性肺炎的重症监护病房(ICU)入院:美国胸科学会(ATS)修订版、美国传染病学会/ATS 版、西班牙版和 SMART-COP。它们的性能各不相同,敏感性约为 70%,特异性约为 80-90%。只有阴性预测值始终较高。关键的方法学问题包括适当的推导参考、研究人群、纳入的变量以及肺炎的时间过程。严重社区获得性肺炎(SCAP)可能由于急性呼吸衰竭或/和严重败血症/感染性休克而进展。肺炎相关并发症和失代偿合并症可能是严重病程的额外或独立原因。预测规则中包含的所有变量都与 SCAP 的两个主要原因有关。然而,作为主要标准,它们对临床评估的价值不大。相反,反映严重程度的有限数量的次要标准似乎更为合适。然而,由于敏感性不足、忽略并发症或失代偿合并症对肺炎严重程度的潜在贡献以及对严重肺炎谱下限的敏感性差,预测规则可能无法满足严重程度评估的主要需求,即 SCAP 风险患者。因此,我们提倡基于一组次要标准并对肺炎的动态性质敏感的方法,参考评估加强治疗而非 ICU 的需求,而不是 ICU。这种强化治疗方法(如急性呼吸衰竭或严重败血症/感染性休克的监测和治疗)被认为通过将重点放在入院时具有严重程度标准的患者和 SCAP 风险患者上,改善管理并可能改善预后。