Hospital acquired pneumonia
ulisses_soares
ulisses_soares1 de Setembro de 2015

Hospital acquired pneumonia

PPT (775.0 KB)
48 páginas
382Número de visitas
Descrição
pneumonia
20pontos
Pontos de download necessários para baixar
este documento
baixar o documento
Pré-visualização3 páginas / 48
Esta é apenas uma pré-visualização
Consulte e baixe o documento completo
Esta é apenas uma pré-visualização
Consulte e baixe o documento completo
Pré-visualização finalizada
Consulte e baixe o documento completo
Esta é apenas uma pré-visualização
Consulte e baixe o documento completo
Esta é apenas uma pré-visualização
Consulte e baixe o documento completo
Pré-visualização finalizada
Consulte e baixe o documento completo
Nosocomial Pneumonia

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Eliane Haron,M.D.

Nosocomial Pneumonia Epidemiology

 Common hospital-acquired infection  Occurs at a rate of approximately 5-10 cases per

1000 hospital admissions  Incidence increases by 6-20 fold in patients being

ventilated mechanically.  One study suggested that the risk for developing VAP

increases 1% per day  Another study suggested, highest risk occur in the

first 5 days after intubation

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Copyright © 2001 ican, INC. Richards, et al. Crit Care Med. 1999;27:887-892.

Site Distribution in Adult ICUs Major Types of Infection (NNIS data, 1992-1997)

27%

GI

CVS

Other

Pneu

31% 4%

4%

EENT

BSI 19%

5%

6% LRTI 4%

UTI

Urinary tract infections (UTI)

Pneumonia (Pneu)

Primary bloodstream infections (BSI)

Gastrointestinal infections (GI)

Cardiovascular system (CVS)

Eye, ear, nose, and throat infection (EENT)

Lower respiratory infections (LRTI) (other than pneumonia)

OtherN = 14,177

Nosocomial Pneumonia Epidemiology  Nosocomial pneumonia is the leading cause

of death due to hospital acquired infections  Associated with substantial morbidity  Has an associated crude mortality of 30-

50%  Hospital stay increases by 7-9 days per

patient  Estimated cost > 1 billion dollars/year

H os

pi ta

l M or

ta lit

y (%

)

0

10

20

30

40

50

None Early Onset Late Onset

Nosocomial Pneumonia

P = . 504

P<.00 1

P<.001

Mortality and Time of Presentation of HAP

Ibrahim, et al. Chest. 2000;117:1434-1442.

*Upper 95% confidence interval

*

* *

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Hence, the importance of focusing

on:  Accurate diagnosis  Appropriate treatment  Preventive measures

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Pathogenesis  Risk factors  Etiologic agents  Differential diagnosis  Treatment  Prevention

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Pathogenesis

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Microaspiration may occur in up to 45% of

healthy volunteers during sleep  Oropharynx of hospitalized patients is

colonized with GNR in 35-75% of patients depending on the severity and type of underlying illness

 Multiple factors are associated with higher risk of colonization with pathogenic bacteria and higher risk of aspiration

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Pathogenesis

 Invasion of the lower respiratory tract by:  Aspiration of oropharyngeal/GI organisms  Inhalation of aerosols containing bacteria  Hematogenous spread

Colonization Aspiration

HAP

MRSA*

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Risk Factors

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Risk Factors

 Host Factors  Extremes of age, severe acute or chronic

illnesses, immunosupression, coma, alcoholism, malnutrition, COPD, DM

 Factors that enhance colonization of the oropharynx and stomach by pathogenic microorganisms

 admission to an ICU, administration of antibiotics, chronic lung disease, endotracheal intubation, etc.

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Risk Factors

 Conditions favoring aspiration or reflux  Supine position, depressed consciousness, endotracheal

intubation, insertion of nasogastric tube  Mechanical ventilation

 Impaired mucociliary function, injury of mucosa favoring bacterial binding, pooling of secretions in the subglottic area, potential exposure to contaminated respiratory equipment and contact with contaminated or colonized hands of HCWs

 Factors that impede adequate pulmonary toilet  Surgical procedures that involve the head and neck,

being immobilized as a result of trauma or illness, sedation etc.

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Etiologic Agents

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Etiologic Agents

 S.aureus  Enterobacteriaceae  P.aeruginosa  Acinetobacter sp.  Polymicrobial  Anaerobic bacteria  Legionella sp.  Aspergillus sp.  Viral

N os

oc om

ia l P

ne um

on ia

(% )

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

PA OSSA ORSA ES SM

P = .003

P = .043

P = .408

P = .985 P = .144

Pathoge n

Early-onset NP Late-onset NP

PA = P aeruginosa OSSA = Oxacillin-sensitive

S aureus ORSA = Oxacillin-resistant

S aureus ES = Enterobacter

species SM = S marcescens

Pathogens Associated With HAP

Ibrahim, et al. Chest. 2000;117:1434-1442.

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Diagnosis

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Diagnosis

 Not necessarily easy to accurately diagnose HAP  Criteria frequently include:

 Clinical  fever ; cough with purulent sputum,

 Radiographic  new or progressive infiltrates on CXR,

 Laboratorial  leukocytosis or leukopenia

 Microbiologic  Suggestive gram stain and positive cultures of sputum,

tracheal aspirate, BAL, bronchial brushing, pleural fluid or blood

 Quantitative cultures

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Problems

 All above criteria fairly sensitive, but very non- specific, particularly in mechanically ventilated patients

 Other criteria/problems include  Positive cultures of blood and pleural fluid plus

clinical findings (specific but poor sensitivity)  Rapid cavitation of pulmonary infiltrate absent Tb

or cancer (rare)  Histopathologic examination of lung tissue

(invasive)

Nosocomial pneumonia

 Bronchoscopically Directed Techniques for diagnosis of VAP and Quantitative cultures  Bronchoscopy with BAL/bronchial brushings (10,000

to 100,000 CFU/ml and less than 1% of squamous cells)

 Protected specimen brush method (>10³ CFU/ml)

 Protected BAL with a balloon tipped catheter (>5% of neutrophils or macrophages with intracellular organisms on a Wright-Giemsa stain)

Nosocomial pneumonia

 Multiple studies looked into the accuracy of quantitative culture and microscopic examination of LRT secretions as compared to histopathologic examination and tissue cultures (either lung biopsy or immediate post mortem obtained samples)

 Several trials conclude that use of FOB techniques and quantitative cultures are more accurate

 At least 4 studies concluded that bronchoscopically directed techniques were not more accurate for diagnosis of VAP than clinical and X-ray criteria, combined with cultures of tracheal aspirate

 Therefore no gold standard criteria exist

 CDC- Emerging Infectious Diseases, March-April 2001

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Differential diagnosis

 ARDS  Pulmonary edema  Pulmonary embolism  Atelectasis  Alveolar hemorrhage  Lung contusion

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Treatment

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Antimicrobial Treatment

 Broad spectrum penicillins  3rd and 4th generation cephalosporins  Carbapenems  Quinolones  Aminoglycosides  Vancomycin  Linezolid

Inadequate Antibiotic

Therapy

Antibiotic Resistance

Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS)

Randomize

Antibiotics 10-21 days

Ciprofloxacin 3 days

Antibiotics 10-21 days

>6: treat as pneumonia

6: discontinue Ciprofloxacin

Reevaluate CPIS at 3 days

Singh, et al. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;162:505-511.

>6 6

Outcomes

Death* 13% 31% .06 ABs>3d 28% 97% .0001 Mean AB costs† $259 $640 .0001

*At 30 days †For patients with CPIS 6 at day 3

Variable Ciprofloxacin Control P Value (n = 39) (n = 42)

Singh, et al. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;162:505-511.

Antimicrobial Superinfections and Resistance (S&R)

S&R 15% 35% .017 MRSA 5% 14% Candida species 8% 14% P aeruginosa 8% 16%

Variable Ciprofloxacin Control P Value

Singh, et al. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2000;162:505-511.

Nosocomial Pneumonia- Treatment Micek et al.Chest,May 2004  Randomized, controlled trial of antibiotic discontinuation for

patients with suspected VAP  Discontinuation group vs. conventional group (clinical judgment

of treating ICU physician)  Discontinuation policy(clinical criteria)

 Non-infectious etiology identified or  Signs and symptoms suggestive of infection had resolved (fever,

leukocytosis, purulent sputum, PaO2/FiO2 ratio > 250, improvement of CXR)

 Only statistically different outcome was duration of antibiotic therapy

 Mortality, length of ICU stay and 2nd episode of VAP were similar in both groups

Torres, A. et al. N Engl J Med 2004;350:433-435

Proposed Strategy for Management of Suspected Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia  Vancomycin versus Linezolid for MRSA pneumonia

 Rubinstein et al. CID2001;32:402-12  Randomized, double blinded, multi-center study  203 patients received Linezolid /193 patients received

Vancomycin  Clinical success equivalent( 66.4% linezolid vs.68.1%

Vancomycin)  Microbiological success equivalent (67.9% Linezolid and

71.8%Vanc)  VRE in stools (0% linezolid vs. 4% Vancomycin)

Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia  Vancomycin versus Linezolid for MRSA

infections/pneumonia

 Stevens et al. CID 2002; 34:1481-90  Randomized, open label study  460 patients  Clinical success equivalent( 73.2% linezolid vs.73.1%

Vancomycin)  Microbiological success equivalent (58.9% Linezolid and

63.2%Vanc)  GI side effects higher in the Linezolid arm

Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia  Vancomycin versus Linezolid for MRSA pneumonia

 Wunderink RG et al.Chest Nov.2003  Retrospective analysis of 2 prospective double blind

multinational studies  160 patients with MRSA VAP received Linezolid or Vancomycin  Outcome assessed 12-28 days post treatment  Logistic regression analysis used to determine the effect of

treatment, and other baseline variables on outcome  Cure rates showed linezolid to be superior ( 59% Linezolid

vs.35.5% Vancomycin, p=0.009))  Survival rates favored Linezolid (80% Linezolid vs. 63.5%

Vancomycin, p=0.03)

Linezolid vs. Vancomycin for VAP

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Cure rate

Survival rate

Linezolid Vancomycin

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Duration of antimicrobial treatment

 Optimal duration of treatment has not been established

 Most experts recommend 14-21 days of treatment

 Recent data support shorter treatment regimens (8 days)

Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia  Comparison of 8 vs.15 days of antibiotics for VAP

 Prospective, randomized, double blind clinical trial  51 French ICUs  401 patients with VAP (quantitative culture results)  Clinical effectiveness comparable, with the possible

exception of VAP caused by non fermenting GNR

 JAMA 290 No 19, November 2003

Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia

0 3 6 9

12 15 18 21 24 27 30 33 36 39 42 45

Mortality Recur Infec

P.aerug Abx Free Days

8days 15 days

Nosocomial Pneumonia

Prevention

Nosocomial pneumonia- Surveillance

Ventilator Utilization Rate

0.3 0.35 0.4

0.45 0.5

0.55 0.6

0.65 0.7

3qtr 2003 4qtr 2003 1qtr 2004 2qtr 2004

Quarter/Year

#V en

t D ay

s/ #P

at ie

nt D

ay s

Ventilator Utilization Rate

NNIS 25th percentile (0.37)

NNIS 50th percentile (0.47)

NNIS 75th percentile (0.53)

Ventilator Associated Pneumonias*

0

2

4 6

8

10

12

3qtr 2003 4qtr 2003 1qtr 2004 2qtr 2004`

Quarter/Year

# VA

P/ 10

00 V

en til

at or

D ay

s

Ventilator Associated Pneumonias

NNIS 25th percentile (2.4)

NNIS 50th percentile (5.1)

NNIS 75th percentile (11.8)

*Ventilator associated pneumonia benchmarks include only data from January 2002-June 2003. The number of pneumonias and ventilator days is a relatively small sampling and the data should be considered provisional.   Quarter/Year # Infections #Ventilator Days # Vent pneumonia/1000 vent days   3qtr 2003 340 0.0 4qtr 2003 2 394 5.1 1qtr 2004 0 347 0.0 2qtr 2004 0 298 0.0 Last 4 qtrs 2 1379 1.5

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Preventive Measures

 Incentive spirometry  Promote early ambulation  Avoid CNS depressants  Decrease duration of immunosupression  Infection control measures  Educate and train personnel

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Preventive Measures

 Avoid prolonged nasal intubation  Suction secretions  Semi-recumbent position( 30-45°head

elevation)  Do not change ventilator circuits routinely

more often than every 48 hours  Drain and discard tubing condensate  Use sterile water for respiratory humidifying

devices  Subglottic secretions drainage

Craven, et al. Chest. 1995;108:s1-s16.

Nosocomial Pneumonia  Preventive Measures

 Remove NGT when no longer needed  Avoid gastric overdistention  Stress ulcer prophylaxis:

 sulcrafate; antacids; H2 receptor antagonists  Acidification of enteral feedings  Prophylactic antibiotics

 Inhaled antibiotics  Selective digestive decontamination

 Chlorexidine oral rinses  Vaccines ( Influenza; Strep.pneumoniae)

Bibliography  MMWR, January 3,1997/vol.46/No.RR-1  Infectious Disease Clinics of North America- December

2003  American J. Resp. Crit Care Medicine Vol. 165, 2002: 867-

903  NEJM Volume 340: 627-634, 1999  Am J Resp Crit Care Med 1995:153:1711.

ATC Guidelines : Hospital-acquired pneumonia in adults  Annals Int. Med.Vol.129,No 6:433-440, 1998  NEJM Volume 344:665-671, 2001  Chest/120/3/September 2001

Bibliography  Thorax; 57:366-371, 2002  NEJM Vol. 350: 433-35, 2004  Emerging Infectious Diseases Vol. 7,No 2, 2001  Up To Date: Diagnosis of ventilator-associated

pneumonia, March 2004  Chest /125/5/Pages 1791-1799 and 1600-1601, May

2004  JAMA vol.290, No 19, November 19, 2003  Chest 124(5):1789-97,November 2003  AntimicrobAgentsChemother 47(11):3442-7, 2003

Bibliography

 Intensive Care Medicine2004Mar;30(3):343-6  Am J Resp Crit Care Med 162(2):505-511, 2000  CID 32:402-412, February 2001  Crit. Care Med.vol.32(1):137-143, January 2004  Am J Resp Crit Care Med vol.168:173-179, 2003  Chest/117:1434-42/September 2000

comentários (0)
Até o momento nenhum comentário
Seja o primeiro a comentar!
Esta é apenas uma pré-visualização
Consulte e baixe o documento completo
Docsity is not optimized for the browser you're using. In order to have a better experience we suggest you to use Internet Explorer 9+, Chrome, Firefox or Safari! Download Google Chrome