Department of Internal Medicine, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, United States.
Department of Biomedical Sciences, Western Michigan University Homer Stryker MD School of Medicine, Kalamazoo, United States.
BMC Infect Dis. 2022 Oct 12;22(1):783. doi: 10.1186/s12879-022-07759-8.
There is not a prevailing consensus on appropriate antibiotic choice, route, and duration in the treatment of bacterial pleural empyema after appropriate source control. Professional society guidelines note the lack of comparative trials with which to guide recommendations. We assessed clinical outcomes in the treatment of known and suspected empyema based upon three aspects of antibiotic use: (1) total duration, (2) duration of intravenous (IV) antibiotics, and (3) duration of anti-anaerobic antibiotics.
We performed a hypothesis-generating retrospective chart review analysis of 355 adult inpatients who had pleural drainage, via either chest tube or surgical intervention, for known or suspected empyema. The primary outcome variable was clinician assessment of resolution or lack thereof. The secondary outcomes were death within 90 days, hospital readmission within 30 days for empyema, and all-cause hospital readmission within 30 days. Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare outcomes with regard to these variables.
None of the independent variables was significantly associated with a difference in clinical resolution rate despite trends for total antibiotic duration and anti-anaerobic antibiotic duration. None of the independent variables was associated with mortality. Longer total antibiotic duration was associated with lower readmission rate for empyema (median 17 [interquartile range 11-28] antibiotic days in non-readmission group vs. 13 [6-15] days in readmission group), with a non-significant trend for all-cause readmission rate (17 [11-28] days vs. 14 [9-21] days). IV antibiotic duration was not associated with a difference in any of the defined outcomes. Longer duration of anti-anaerobic antibiotics was associated with both lower all-cause readmission (8.5 [0-17] vs. 2 [0-11]) and lower readmission rate for empyema (8 [0-17] vs. 2 [0-3]).
Our data support the premise that routine use of anti-anaerobic antibiotics is indicated in the treatment of pleural empyema. However, our study casts doubt on the benefits of extended IV rather than oral antibiotics in the treatment of empyema. This represents a target for future investigation that could potentially limit complications associated with the excessive use of IV antibiotics.
在适当控制感染源后,对于细菌性脓胸的治疗,在抗生素的选择、使用途径和使用时间方面,尚无普遍共识。专业协会指南指出,缺乏可用于指导建议的对照试验。我们根据抗生素使用的三个方面(1)总疗程,(2)静脉(IV)抗生素疗程,和(3)抗厌氧菌抗生素疗程,评估了已知和疑似脓胸治疗的临床结局。
我们对 355 名成年住院患者进行了假设生成的回顾性图表审查分析,这些患者因已知或疑似脓胸通过胸腔引流管或手术干预进行了治疗。主要结局变量是临床医生对解决或未解决情况的评估。次要结局是 90 天内死亡,30 天内因脓胸再次住院,以及 30 天内全因再次住院。 Mann-Whitney U 检验用于比较这些变量的结果。
尽管总抗生素疗程和抗厌氧菌抗生素疗程有趋势,但独立变量均与临床缓解率无显著差异。独立变量均与死亡率无关。更长的总抗生素疗程与脓胸再入院率较低相关(非再入院组的中位抗生素天数为 17 [11-28]天,再入院组为 13 [6-15]天),全因再入院率呈显著趋势(17 [11-28]天 vs. 14 [9-21]天)。IV 抗生素疗程与任何定义的结局均无差异。抗厌氧菌抗生素疗程较长与全因再入院率(8.5 [0-17] vs. 2 [0-11])和脓胸再入院率(8 [0-17] vs. 2 [0-3])均较低相关。
我们的数据支持常规使用抗厌氧菌抗生素治疗脓胸的前提。然而,我们的研究对延长 IV 而非口服抗生素治疗脓胸的益处提出了质疑。这代表了未来研究的一个目标,可能会限制与过度使用 IV 抗生素相关的并发症。