Rural Health Academic Center, Melbourne Medical School, University of Melbourne, Melbourne; Infection Control Committees, St. John of God Hospital and Ballarat Health Services, and Division of Internal Medicine, Ballarat Health Services, Ballarat, VIC, Australia.
Chest. 2014 Oct;146(4):890-898. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-2926.
Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) develops in approximately 20% of patients in the ICU receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation (MV). Among the range of methods for preventing VAP, the evidence base for topical antibiotics (TAs), including selective digestive decontamination, appears to be the most compelling. However, several observations are puzzling, and the contextual influence resulting from concurrent use of both topical placebo and TA within an ICU remains untested. As with herd protection conferred by vaccination, contextual influences resulting from a population-based intervention cannot be estimated at the level of a single trial. Estimating contextual effects requires multilevel random-effects methods. In this way the dispersion in VAP incidence across groups from 206 studies, as cited in various-source systematic reviews, was calibrated. The benchmark mean VAP incidence derived from 49 observational groups of patients receiving MV is 23.7% (95% CI, 20.6%-27.2%). In contrast, for 20 and 15 concurrent control groups from the TA evidence base that did vs did not receive topical placebo, respectively, this incidence is 38% (95% CI, 29%-48%) and 33% (95% CI, 20%-50%). This contextual influence remains significant in a meta-regression model adjusted for group-level variables, such as within a trauma ICU context. The mean VAP incidence for five other categories of control groups from the broader evidence base is within four percentage points of the benchmark. The contextual effect of TA is paradoxic, peculiar, potent, perfidious, and potentially perilous. The TA evidence base requires reappraisal to consider this herd peril.
呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)在接受长时间机械通气(MV)的 ICU 患者中约有 20%发生。在预防 VAP 的一系列方法中,局部抗生素(TAs),包括选择性消化道去污染,其证据基础似乎最为有力。然而,有几个观察结果令人费解,并且 ICU 中同时使用局部安慰剂和 TA 所产生的背景影响尚未经过测试。就像疫苗接种带来的群体保护一样,基于人群的干预措施所产生的背景影响无法在单个试验中进行估计。估计背景效应需要使用多层次随机效应方法。通过这种方式,对各种来源的系统评价中引用的 206 项研究中,206 个组之间的 VAP 发生率的离散度进行了校准。从接受 MV 的 49 个观察组患者中得出的基准平均 VAP 发生率为 23.7%(95%CI,20.6%-27.2%)。相比之下,对于 TA 证据基础中分别接受和未接受局部安慰剂的 20 个和 15 个同期对照组,该发生率分别为 38%(95%CI,29%-48%)和 33%(95%CI,20%-50%)。在调整了组水平变量(如创伤 ICU 环境)的荟萃回归模型中,这种背景影响仍然显著。在更广泛的证据基础中,其他五类对照组的平均 VAP 发生率与基准值相差四个百分点以内。TA 的背景效应是矛盾的、奇特的、有力的、背信弃义的,并且可能是危险的。TA 的证据基础需要重新评估,以考虑这种群体危害。