Department of Internal Medicine (Pulmonary Medicine), Sher I Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences (SKIMS), Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, 190001, India.
Department of Microbiology, Sher I Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences (SKIMS), Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, 190001, India.
Lung. 2018 Aug;196(4):469-479. doi: 10.1007/s00408-018-0117-7. Epub 2018 Apr 25.
Data regarding the comparative profiling of HCAP and HAP from developing countries like India are scant. We set out to address the microbial aetiology, antibiotic resistance and treatment outcomes in patients with HCAP and HAP.
318 consenting patients with HCAP (n = 165, aged 16-90 years; median 60 years; 97 males) or HAP (n = 153; aged 16-85 years; median 45 years; 92 males) presenting to a tertiary care hospital in North India from 2013 to 2015 were prospectively recruited for the study. Data on patient characteristics, microbial aetiology, APACHE II scores, treatment outcomes and mortality were studied. Clinical outcomes were compared with various possible predictors employing logistic regression analysis.
Patients in HCAP had more comorbidity. Escherichia coli (30, 18%) and Acinetobacter baumannii (62, 41%) were the most commonly isolated bacteria in HCAP and HAP, respectively. Multidrug-resistant bacteria were isolated more frequently in HCAP, only because the incidence of extensively drug-resistant bacteria was markedly high in HAP (p = 0.00). The mean APACHE II score was lower in HCAP (17.55 ± 6.406, range 30) compared to HAP (19.74 ± 8.843, range 37; p = 0.013). The length of stay ≥ 5 days (p = 0.036) and in-hospital mortality was higher in HAP group (p = 0.002). The most reliable predictors of in-hospital mortality in HCAP and HAP were APACHE II score ≥ 17 (OR = 14, p = 0.00; HAP: OR = 10.8, p = 0.00), and septic shock (OR = 4.5, p = 0.00; HAP: OR = 6.9, p = 0.00).
The patient characteristics in HCAP, treatment outcomes, bacterial aetiology, and a higher incidence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, suggest that HCAP although not as severe as HAP, can be grouped as a separate third entity.
关于发展中国家(如印度)的 HCAP 和 HAP 的比较分析数据很少。我们旨在解决 HCAP 和 HAP 患者的微生物病因、抗生素耐药性和治疗结果。
2013 年至 2015 年,我们从印度北部的一家三级保健医院前瞻性招募了 318 名同意参加研究的 HCAP(n=165,年龄 16-90 岁;中位数 60 岁;男性 97 名)或 HAP(n=153;年龄 16-85 岁;中位数 45 岁;男性 92 名)患者。研究了患者特征、微生物病因、APACHE II 评分、治疗结果和死亡率。采用逻辑回归分析比较了临床结果与各种可能的预测因素。
HCAP 患者合并症更多。大肠埃希菌(30,18%)和鲍曼不动杆菌(62,41%)分别是 HCAP 和 HAP 中最常见的分离细菌。HCAP 中分离出更多的多药耐药菌,这仅仅是因为 HAP 中广泛耐药菌的发生率明显较高(p=0.00)。与 HAP 相比,HCAP 的平均 APACHE II 评分较低(17.55±6.406,范围 30),而 HAP 的平均 APACHE II 评分较高(19.74±8.843,范围 37;p=0.013)。HCAP 组的住院时间≥5 天(p=0.036)和院内死亡率较高(p=0.002)。HCAP 和 HAP 住院死亡率的最可靠预测因素是 APACHE II 评分≥17(OR=14,p=0.00;HAP:OR=10.8,p=0.00)和感染性休克(OR=4.5,p=0.00;HAP:OR=6.9,p=0.00)。
HCAP 的患者特征、治疗结果、细菌病因以及更高的抗生素耐药菌发生率表明,HCAP 虽然不如 HAP 严重,但可以归类为另一种单独的实体。