Owen R Albin1, Oryan Henig1, Twisha S Patel2, Thomas S Valley1, Jason M Pogue3, Lindsay A Petty1, John P Mills1, Adamo Brancaccio2, Emily T Martin4, Keith S Kaye1. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 2. Department of Pharmacy Services, University of Michigan Hospitals and Health Centers, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. 3. Department of Pharmacy Services, Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, Michigan, USA. 4. School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Microbiologic cure is a common outcome in pneumonia clinical trials, but its clinical significance is incompletely understood. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients hospitalized with bacterial pneumonia who achieved clinical cure. Rates of recurrent pneumonia and death were compared between patients with persistent growth of the index pathogen at the time of clinical cure (microbiologic failure) and those with pathogen eradication (microbiologic cure). RESULTS: Among 441 patients, 237 experienced microbiologic cure and 204 experienced microbiologic failure. Prevalences of comorbidities, ventilator dependence, and severity of acute illness were similar between groups. Patients with microbiologic failure experienced significantly higher rates of recurrent pneumonia or death following clinical cure than patients with microbiologic cure, controlling for comorbid conditions, severity of acute illness, appropriateness of empiric antibiotics, intensive care unit placement, tracheostomy dependence, and immunocompromised status (90-day multivariable adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.35). This association was observed among patients with pneumonias caused by Staphylococcus aureus (90-day multivariable adjusted OR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.73-7.90). A trend was observed among pneumonias caused by nonfermenting gram-negative bacilli, but not Enterobacteriaceae or other pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: Microbiologic treatment failure was independently associated with recurrent pneumonia or death among patients with bacterial pneumonia following clinical cure. Microbiologic cure merits further study as a metric to guide therapeutic interventions for patients with bacterial pneumonia.
BACKGROUND: Microbiologic cure is a common outcome in pneumonia clinical trials, but its clinical significance is incompletely understood. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients hospitalized with bacterial pneumonia who achieved clinical cure. Rates of recurrent pneumonia and death were compared between patients with persistent growth of the index pathogen at the time of clinical cure (microbiologic failure) and those with pathogen eradication (microbiologic cure). RESULTS: Among 441 patients, 237 experienced microbiologic cure and 204 experienced microbiologic failure. Prevalences of comorbidities, ventilator dependence, and severity of acute illness were similar between groups. Patients with microbiologic failure experienced significantly higher rates of recurrent pneumonia or death following clinical cure than patients with microbiologic cure, controlling for comorbid conditions, severity of acute illness, appropriateness of empiric antibiotics, intensive care unit placement, tracheostomy dependence, and immunocompromised status (90-day multivariable adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.35). This association was observed among patients with pneumonias caused by Staphylococcus aureus (90-day multivariable adjusted OR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.73-7.90). A trend was observed among pneumonias caused by nonfermenting gram-negative bacilli, but not Enterobacteriaceae or other pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: Microbiologic treatment failure was independently associated with recurrent pneumonia or death among patients with bacterial pneumonia following clinical cure. Microbiologic cure merits further study as a metric to guide therapeutic interventions for patients with bacterial pneumonia.
Authors: Ilias I Siempos; Konstantinos Z Vardakas; Christos E Kyriakopoulos; Theodora K Ntaidou; Matthew E Falagas Journal: Shock Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Andre C Kalil; Mark L Metersky; Michael Klompas; John Muscedere; Daniel A Sweeney; Lucy B Palmer; Lena M Napolitano; Naomi P O'Grady; John G Bartlett; Jordi Carratalà; Ali A El Solh; Santiago Ewig; Paul D Fey; Thomas M File; Marcos I Restrepo; Jason A Roberts; Grant W Waterer; Peggy Cruse; Shandra L Knight; Jan L Brozek Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2016-07-14 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Wilhelmina G Melsen; Maroeska M Rovers; Rolf H H Groenwold; Dennis C J J Bergmans; Christophe Camus; Torsten T Bauer; Ernst W Hanisch; Bengt Klarin; Mirelle Koeman; Wolfgang A Krueger; Jean-Claude Lacherade; Leonardo Lorente; Ziad A Memish; Lee E Morrow; Giuseppe Nardi; Christianne A van Nieuwenhoven; Grant E O'Keefe; George Nakos; Frank A Scannapieco; Philippe Seguin; Thomas Staudinger; Arzu Topeli; Miquel Ferrer; Marc J M Bonten Journal: Lancet Infect Dis Date: 2013-04-25 Impact factor: 25.071