Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, National Hospital Organization Kyoto Medical Center, Kyoto, 612-8555 Japan.
Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, National Hospital Organization Kyoto Medical Center, Kyoto, 612-8555 Japan ; Department of Emergency and Critical Care Medicine, National Hospital Organization Kyoto Medical Center, Kyoto, 612-8555 Japan.
J Intensive Care. 2013 Oct 23;1(1):2. doi: 10.1186/2052-0492-1-2. eCollection 2013.
Semi-quantitative Gram stain and culture methods are still commonly used for diagnosing ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), due to its convenience. Only a few studies, however, have assessed the reliability of these methods when compared with quantitative cultures, a current standard for the diagnosis of VAP. The objective of this study was to assess the utility of semi-quantitative scores obtained using Gram stains and cultures of endotracheal aspirates when compared with quantitative cultures in the diagnosis of VAP.
A retrospective chart review of mechanically ventilated patients with clinically suspected VAP in a single intensive care unit was performed. Semi-quantitative scores of Gram stains or culture results were compared with quantitative culture results of endotracheal aspirate for the diagnosis of VAP in 136 samples for 51 patients.
The semi-quantitative scores of Gram stains and the semi-quantitative culture results significantly correlated with the log value of the quantitative culture results (r s = 0.64 and 0.75). When using a log count ≥6 of quantitative cultures as the reference standard for the diagnosis of VAP, the sensitivity and specificity was 95% and 61% for Gram stain score of ≥1+, and was 42% and 96% for Gram stain score ≥3+, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity was 96% and 40% for the semi-quantitative culture score of ≥2+, and was 59% and 86% for the semi-quantitative culture score of ≥3+, respectively.
Absence of bacteria in semi-quantitative Gram stain and poor growth (≤1+) in semi-quantitative culture method could be utilized to exclude the possibility of VAP, whereas detection of abundant (≥3+) bacteria in semi-quantitative Gram stain could be utilized to strongly suspect VAP.
半定量革兰氏染色和培养方法由于其便利性,仍常用于诊断呼吸机相关性肺炎(VAP)。然而,与目前诊断 VAP 的金标准——定量培养相比,仅有少数研究评估了这些方法的可靠性。本研究旨在评估经气管抽吸物的半定量革兰氏染色和培养评分与定量培养相比,在诊断 VAP 中的应用价值。
对单重症监护病房中疑似 VAP 的机械通气患者进行回顾性图表审查。对 51 名患者的 136 份样本进行了半定量革兰氏染色或培养结果与经气管抽吸物定量培养结果的比较,以诊断 VAP。
革兰氏染色的半定量评分和半定量培养结果与定量培养结果的对数呈显著相关性(r s = 0.64 和 0.75)。当使用定量培养的对数≥6 作为 VAP 诊断的参考标准时,革兰氏染色评分≥1+的敏感性和特异性分别为 95%和 61%,革兰氏染色评分≥3+的敏感性和特异性分别为 42%和 96%。半定量培养评分≥2+的敏感性和特异性分别为 96%和 40%,半定量培养评分≥3+的敏感性和特异性分别为 59%和 86%。
半定量革兰氏染色无细菌和半定量培养方法生长不良(≤1+)可用于排除 VAP 的可能性,而半定量革兰氏染色中大量(≥3+)细菌的检测可用于强烈怀疑 VAP。