Mier L, Dreyfuss D, Darchy B, Lanore J J, Djedaïni K, Weber P, Brun P, Coste F
Service de Réanimation Médicale, Hôpital Louis Mourier, Colombes, France.
Intensive Care Med. 1993;19(5):279-84. doi: 10.1007/BF01690548.
To evaluate the bacteriology of early aspiration pneumonia using a protected specimen brush and quantitative culture techniques, and whether penicillin G is adequate as initial treatment pending culture results.
52 patients (of which 45 required mechanical ventilation) meeting usual clinical criteria for aspiration pneumonia were prospectively included. On admission, patients were given intravenous penicillin G and a protected specimen brush was performed < or = 48 h after.
Cultures of the brush were negative (< 10(3) CFU/ml) in 33 patients (1 had blood cultures positive with S. pneumoniae) and positive (> or = 10(3) CFU/ml) for S. pneumoniae in 2 patients. Seventeen patients had a positive culture (> or = 10(3) CFU/ml) for at least one penicillin G resistant microorganism, with a total of 20 organisms (S. aureus: 6; H. influenzae: 2; Enterobacteriaceae: 8; P. aeruginosa: 3; C. albicans: 1). In 4 of these patients, a penicillin-sensitive pathogen was also recovered in significant concentrations (S. pneumoniae: 2; Streptococcus sp.: 2). These 17 patients with a resistant pathogen did not differ from the 35 other patients with respect to need for ventilatory support and mortality rate. By contrast, they were older (61.1 +/- 21.9 vs. 42.9 +/- 18.8 years; p < 0.005) and required longer mechanical ventilation (6.1 +/- 4.6 vs. 3.5 +/- 2.7 days; p < 0.03) and hospitalization (11.2 +/- 8.8 vs. 6.7 +/- 4.7 days; p < 0.02). Of 17 patients 12 with penicillin G resistant organisms versus 0/35 without, were in-hospital patients and/or had a digestive disorder (p < 0.001).
The broad range of offending organisms seen in early aspiration pneumonia precludes use of any single empiric regimen, making protected specimen brush mandatory in many patients. Nevertheless, the involvement of S.pneumoniae in a notable proportion of our patients suggests that routine penicillin prophylaxis after early aspiration (at least in most patients with community-acquired aspiration) is warranted given the potential severity of pneumococcal sepsis in such patients.
运用保护性标本刷和定量培养技术评估早期吸入性肺炎的细菌学情况,以及在培养结果出来之前青霉素G作为初始治疗是否足够。
前瞻性纳入52例符合吸入性肺炎常规临床标准的患者(其中45例需要机械通气)。入院时,患者接受静脉注射青霉素G,并在≤48小时后进行保护性标本刷检。
33例患者的刷检培养结果为阴性(<10³CFU/ml)(1例血培养肺炎链球菌阳性),2例患者的肺炎链球菌培养结果为阳性(≥10³CFU/ml)。17例患者至少有一种对青霉素G耐药的微生物培养结果为阳性(≥10³CFU/ml),共有20种微生物(金黄色葡萄球菌:6种;流感嗜血杆菌:2种;肠杆菌科细菌:8种;铜绿假单胞菌:3种;白色念珠菌:1种)。在其中4例患者中,还检测到浓度较高的对青霉素敏感的病原体(肺炎链球菌:2种;链球菌属:2种)。这17例有耐药病原体的患者在通气支持需求和死亡率方面与其他35例患者没有差异。相比之下,他们年龄更大(61.1±21.9岁对42.9±18.8岁;p<0.005),需要更长时间的机械通气(6.1±4.6天对3.5±2.7天;p<0.03)和住院时间(11.2±8.8天对6.7±4.7天;p<0.02)。17例有青霉素G耐药微生物的患者中有12例是住院患者和/或患有消化系统疾病,而35例无耐药微生物的患者中为0例(p<0.001)。
早期吸入性肺炎中涉及的病原体种类繁多,排除了使用任何单一经验性治疗方案的可能性,这使得在许多患者中进行保护性标本刷检成为必要。然而,相当比例的患者中存在肺炎链球菌感染,鉴于此类患者中肺炎球菌败血症的潜在严重性,提示早期吸入后常规使用青霉素预防(至少在大多数社区获得性吸入患者中)是有必要的。