Open Access

A week seems to be weak: tailoring duration of antibiotic treatment in Gram-negative ventilator-associated pneumonia

Critical Care201317:106

DOI: 10.1186/cc11899

Published: 21 January 2013

Abstract

The optimal length of antimicrobial therapy has not been extensively studied for a great majority of infections and, in critically ill patients affected by ventilator-associated pneumonia, is a persisting and unsolved issue confronting clinicians. The integration of biomarkers, clinical judgment, and microbiologic eradication might help to define a shorter duration for some ventilator-associated pneumonia episodes due to non-fermenting Gram-negative bacilli, but until these strategies are implemented in clinical practice for individualizing antibiotic treatment, a short-course duration does not seem to tailor a long benefit.

Introduction

In the previous issue of Critical Care, Kollef and colleagues [1] compared 7 days of doripenem with 10 days of imipenem in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by Gram-negative bacilli (GNB). The 7-day course arm was found to have non-significant higher rates of clinical failure and mortality compared with the 10-day course arm. On the basis of the reported data, an independent data monitoring committee, which was blinded to treatment arm assignment, wisely decided to stop the present trial.

The impact of potential resistant microorganisms (PRMs), including non-fermenting GNB (NF-GNB), that cause nosocomial infection is a major health problem [2] and contributes to unfavorable clinical outcome and increased resource utilization [3]. The greater hospital mortality associated has been attributed to the increased occurrence of inadequate initial antibiotic treatment and virulence factors [4]. Although several guidelines recommend treating patients according to defined patient risk factors, the consideration of intensive care unit (ICU) ecology must provide a more rational basis for selecting initial therapy for VAP patients before culture results are available [5, 6].

The optimal length of antimicrobial therapy has not been extensively studied for a great majority of infections and, in critically ill patients affected by VAP, is a persisting and unsolved issue confronting clinicians. Does a shorter duration achieve a longer benefit? The answer is not easy. In clinical practice, several strategies have been used for shorter antibiotic therapy in VAP. Micek and colleagues [7] performed a randomized prospective study in patients with VAP and found that reevaluation strategies decreased antibiotic duration (6.0 ± 4.9 days versus 8.0 ± 5.6 days). Chastre and colleagues [8] performed a randomized study that found that an 8-day duration of treatment was associated with an outcome similar to that of a 15-day treatment in terms of mortality, ventilator-free days, and stay in the ICU; interestingly, there were no differences in super-infection and relapse of pneumonia, but for primary infections caused by NF-GNB, a higher percentage of patients developed documented pulmonary infection recurrence in the 8-day than the 15-day group (41% versus 26%). Nevertheless, a retrospective study could not find a higher recurrence rate in patients with NF-GNB-caused VAP who received not more than 8 days of antibiotic therapy compared with at least 9 days. Also, in the study by Kollef and colleagues [1], the clinical pulmonary infection score (CPIS) was similar for the first 8 days of treatment and remained stable in the 1-week course but in the 10-day arm continued to decrease. In a study by Singh and colleagues [9] more than a decade ago, antibiotics were maintained for 10 to 21 days for patients with a high CPIS, but for those with a low CPIS (<6), the antibiotic either was free choice or was based on a reevaluation strategy after 72 hours: the antibiotic was stopped if the score decreased or remained constant and was continued if the CPIS increased. No differences in mortality and ICU stay were found; however, less time on antibiotic therapy and lower cost were achieved in the reevaluation group.

Current guidelines for VAP recommend a fixed duration of antibiotic therapy (7 to 8 days) for patients with uncomplicated VAP with good clinical response but not for patients with VAP episodes caused by NF-GNB [10]. One of the several unique characteristics and pathogenic properties of NF-GNB is the structure of the outer membrane. In recent years, there have been some notable studies that might help clinicians to better customize treatment duration and that include the use of a single biomarker or a combination of them. Although biomarkers have been extensively investigated for the management of infections from different sources in critically ill patients, the number of patients with VAP included is low for solid recommendations [11]. On the other hand, microbiologic eradication might be a useful end-point [12]. Montravers and colleagues [13], in a study of quantitative cultures of bronchoscopic protected specimen brush (PSB) obtained after the administration of effective antibiotic therapy, showed complete eradication of the causative organisms after only 3 days of treatment in two thirds of patients. More recently, Mueller and colleagues [14] found that the use of repeat bronchoalveolar lavage decreased the duration of antibiotic therapy for NF-GNB VAP from 14 to 10 days, but this approach requires an invasive technique.

Conclusions

In summary, it is clear that a period of 7 days of antibiotic treatment in NF-GNB is not enough, and more exploratory trials for VAP due to NF-GNB are clearly not recommended. Until a strategy based on the integration of clinical judgment, dynamic changes in biomarkers, and microbiologic eradication can be implemented for tailoring antibiotic treatment in daily clinical practice, a week of antibiotic treatment seems to be weak.

Abbreviations

CPIS: 

Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score

ICU: 

intensive care unit

NF-GNB: 

nonfermenting Gram-negative bacilli

PRM: 

potentially resistant microorganism

PSB: 

protected specimen brush

VAP: 

ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Critical Care Centre, Corporación Sanitaria Universitaria Parc Tauli, Sabadell University Hospital, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona CIBER Enfermedades Respiratorias Parc Taulí
(2)
Servei de Pneumologia, Institut Clinic del Tòrax, Hospital Clinic, Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBER Enfermedades Respiratorias, University of BarcelonaVillarroel

References

  1. Kollef MH, Chastre J, Clavel M, Restrepo MI, Michiels B, Kaniga K, Cirillo I, Kimko H, Redman R: A randomized trial of 7-day doripenem versus 10-day imipenem-cilastatin for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care 2012, 16: R218. 10.1186/cc11862PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Vincent JL, Rello J, Marshall J, Silva E, Anzueto A, Martin CD, Moreno R, Lipman J, Gomersall C, Sakr Y, Reinhart K, EPIC II Group of Investigators: International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. JAMA 2009, 302: 2323-2329. 10.1001/jama.2009.1754View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Trouillet JL, Chastre J, Vuagnat A, Joly-Guillou ML, Combaux D, Dombret MC, Gibert C: Ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by potentially drug-resistant bacteria. Am J Respi Crit Care Med 1998, 157: 531-539.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Ibrahim EH, Ward S, Sherman G, Schaiff R, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH: Experience with a clinical guideline for the treatment of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care Med 2001, 29: 1109-1115. 10.1097/00003246-200106000-00003View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Martin-Loeches I, Deja M, Koulenti D, Dimopoulos G, Marsh B, Torres A, Niederman M, Rello J, EU-VAP Study Investigators: Potentially-resistant microorganisms in intubated patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia. The interaction of ecology, shock and risk factors. Intensive Care Med, in press.
  6. Ferrer M, Liapikou A, Valencia M, Esperatti M, Theessen A, Antonio Martinez J, Mensa J, Torres A: Validation of the American Thoracic Society-Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for hospital-acquired pneumonia in the intensive care unit. Clin Infect Dis 2010, 50: 945-952. 10.1086/651075View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Micek ST, Ward S, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH: A randomized controlled trial of an antibiotic discontinuation policy for clinically suspected ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest 2004, 125: 1791-1799. 10.1378/chest.125.5.1791View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chastre J, Wolff M, Fagon JY, Chevret S, Thomas F, Wermert D, Clementi E, Gonzalez J, Jusserand D, Asfar P, Perrin D, Fieux F, Aubas S, Pneum A, Trial Group: Comparison of 8 vs 15 days of antibiotic therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia in adults: a randomized trial. JAMA 2003, 290: 2588-2598. 10.1001/jama.290.19.2588View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Singh N, Rogers P, Atwood CW, Wagener MM, Yu VL: Short-course empiric antibiotic therapy for patients with pulmonary infiltrates in the intensive care unit. A proposed solution for indiscriminate antibiotic prescription. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000, 162: 505-511.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. American Thoracic Society; Infectious Diseases Society of America: Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005, 171: 388-416.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Póvoa P, Salluh JI: Biomarker-guided antibiotic therapy in adult critically ill patients: a critical review. Ann Intensive Care 2012, 23: 32.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Wunderink RG: Surrogate markers and microbiologic end points. Clin Infect Dis 2010,51(Suppl 1):S126-130.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Montravers P, Fagon JY, Chastre J, Lecso M, Dombret MC, Trouillet JL, Gibert C: Follow-up protected specimen brushes to assess treatment in nosocomial pneumonia. Am Rev Respir Dis 1993, 147: 38-44. 10.1164/ajrccm/147.1.38View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Mueller EW, Croce MA, Boucher BA, Hanes SD, Wood GC, Swanson JM, Chennault SK, Fabian TC: Repeat bronchoalveolar lavage to guide antibiotic duration for ventilator-associated pneumonia. J Trauma 2007, 63: 1329-1337. 10.1097/TA.0b013e31812f6c46View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© BioMed Central Ltd 2013

Advertisement