Karvouniaris Marios, Koulenti Despoina, Bougioukas Konstantinos I, Pagkalidou Eirini, Paramythiotou Elizabeth, Haidich Anna-Bettina
Intensive Care Unit, AHEPA University Hospital, 54636 Thessaloniki, Greece.
Department of Critical Care, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, SE5 9RS London, UK.
Antibiotics (Basel). 2025 Apr 2;14(4):370. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics14040370.
Ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) and pneumonia (VAP) are the most frequent nosocomial infections in the critical care setting and are associated with increased morbidity. At the same time, VAP is also associated with attributable mortality, especially when caused by difficult-to-treat (DTR) Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) that have limited treatment options. Studies have assessed the impact of nebulized aminoglycosides or colistin to improve VAT and VAP outcomes or as an adjunct to intravenous antimicrobial treatment or as a preventive approach.
This overview aimed to assess systematic reviews that examine the efficacy and safety of antimicrobial nebulization for preventing and treating ventilator-associated infections in the critically ill.
Systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and original randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies were included. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane, Epistemonikos, and PROSPERO. The methodological quality assessment was performed using standardized tools.
Regarding VAP treatment, the included systematic reviews presented critically low quality. The clinical response effect size to amikacin and colistin nebulization were RR 1.23 (95% CI 1.13-1.34), I = 47% and OR 1.39 (0.87-2.20), I = 56%. The main safety concern was bronchospasm with RR 2.55 (1.40-4.66), I = 0% and OR 5.19 (1.05-25.52), I = 0%. The certainty of evidence was usually very low. For VAT treatment, limited evidence showed a better clinical response and less emergence of resistant bacteria. Regarding VAP prevention, data are limited to two trials; however, only the larger one presented a low risk of bias and resulted in a reduced VAP rate.
Delivery via nebulization might be considered in addition to IV antimicrobial treatment of GNB ventilator-associated infections. The available evidence is weak, and more studies focused on infections due to DTR-GNBs should be prioritized.
呼吸机相关性气管支气管炎(VAT)和肺炎(VAP)是重症监护环境中最常见的医院感染,与发病率增加相关。同时,VAP还与可归因的死亡率相关,特别是当由治疗困难(DTR)的革兰氏阴性菌(GNB)引起时,其治疗选择有限。已有研究评估了雾化氨基糖苷类药物或多粘菌素对改善VAT和VAP结局的影响,或将其作为静脉抗菌治疗的辅助手段或预防措施。
本综述旨在评估关于抗菌药物雾化预防和治疗重症患者呼吸机相关性感染的疗效和安全性的系统评价。
纳入系统评价、荟萃分析以及原始随机对照试验和前瞻性观察性研究。检索了MEDLINE(通过PubMed)、Cochrane、Epistemonikos和PROSPERO数据库。使用标准化工具进行方法学质量评估。
关于VAP治疗,纳入的系统评价质量极低。阿米卡星和多粘菌素雾化治疗的临床反应效应大小分别为RR 1.23(95%CI 1.13 - 1.34),I² = 47%以及OR 1.39(0.87 - 2.20),I² = 56%。主要的安全问题是支气管痉挛,RR为2.55(1.40 - 4.66),I² = 0%以及OR为5.19(1.05 - 25.52),I² = 0%。证据的确定性通常非常低。对于VAT治疗,有限的证据表明临床反应更好且耐药菌出现较少。关于VAP预防,数据仅限于两项试验;然而,只有较大的一项试验存在低偏倚风险,且导致VAP发生率降低。
除了对GNB呼吸机相关性感染进行静脉抗菌治疗外,还可考虑雾化给药。现有证据不足,应优先开展更多针对DTR - GNBs所致感染的研究。