Service des Maladies Infectieuses et Médecine Interne, Centre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois, 1 Avenue de l'Hopital - Epagny Metz Tessy BP90074, 74374 Pringy Cedex, France.
Infect Dis Now. 2024 Jun;54(4S):104925. doi: 10.1016/j.idnow.2024.104925. Epub 2024 May 18.
Inflammatory response to aggressive infection is responsible not only for symptoms, especially pain, but also for severity, when the inflammatory cascade is violent, and provokes a deleterious cytokine storm. Due to their anti-inflammatory properties, corticosteroids are widely used in ambulatory medical practice. While their beneficial effects on some symptoms, particularly pain, are undeniable, so are the risks associated with their other properties (immunosuppression, neurostimulation, hypermetabolism), even during short-term administration at low doses. Following robust risk-benefit assessment, the role of corticosteroids in the treatment of a number of serious pathologies (septic shock, severe acute community-acquired pneumonia, and some forms of bacterial meningitis such as hypoxia-related pneumocystosis, etc.) is presently well-defined. The objective of this review is not to consider the role of corticosteroids in cases of severe infectious disease necessitating hospital-based management, or in contexts where there exists a clear consensus in favor of their utilization. This work represents an attempt to apprise the current state of knowledge on the interest of corticosteroids in the management of infections in adults in primary care. Corticosteroid treatment can be beneficial with regard to some of the infectious diseases treated in primary care. That said, when the benefit actually appears, it remains modest, and the level of evidence supporting the utilization of corticosteroids is low or moderate. In no situation is an indication for corticosteroid therapy official or even, at the very least, indisputable. With regard to the pathologies under consideration, corticosteroid prescription must imperatively be based on impeccable characterization of the clinical situation, diagnosis of severity, knowledge of the disease field, and risk-benefit assessment for a given patient.
炎症反应对侵袭性感染不仅负责症状,尤其是疼痛,还负责严重程度,当炎症级联反应剧烈时,会引发有害的细胞因子风暴。由于其抗炎特性,皮质类固醇在门诊医疗实践中得到广泛应用。虽然它们对某些症状(尤其是疼痛)的有益效果是不可否认的,但它们的其他特性(免疫抑制、神经刺激、代谢亢进)所带来的风险也是存在的,即使在短期、低剂量给药时也是如此。经过强有力的风险效益评估,皮质类固醇在一些严重疾病(脓毒性休克、严重急性社区获得性肺炎和某些形式的细菌性脑膜炎,如与缺氧相关的卡氏肺孢子虫病等)的治疗中的作用目前已得到明确界定。本文的目的不是考虑皮质类固醇在需要住院管理的严重传染病或在明确支持其应用的情况下的作用。这篇文章试图了解皮质类固醇在初级保健成人感染管理中的作用。皮质类固醇治疗对某些在初级保健中治疗的感染性疾病可能有益。也就是说,当实际上出现益处时,其程度仍然是适度的,并且支持皮质类固醇应用的证据水平较低或中等。在任何情况下,皮质类固醇治疗的适应症都不是官方的,甚至是不容置疑的。就所考虑的疾病而言,皮质类固醇的处方必须基于对临床情况、严重程度的诊断、对疾病领域的了解以及对特定患者的风险效益评估的精准描述。