• Judith Marin-Corral, Sergi Pascual-Guardia, Francesco Amati, Stefano Aliberti, Joan R Masclans, Nilam Soni, Alejandro Rodriguez, Oriol Sibila, Francisco Sanz, Giovanni Sotgiu, Antonio Anzueto, Katerina Dimakou, Roberta Petrino, Ewoudt van de Garde, Marcos I Restrepo, and GLIMP investigators.
• Critical Care Department, Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain, and the Critical Illness Research Group (GREPAC), Institut Hospital del Mar d'Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain; Division of Pulmonary Diseases & Critical Care Medicine, University of Texas Health San Antonio, San Antonio, TX.
• Chest. 2021 Jan 1; 159 (1): 58-72.

BackgroundAspiration community-acquired pneumonia (ACAP) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in patients with aspiration risk factors (AspRFs) are infections associated with anaerobes, but limited evidence suggests their pathogenic role.Research QuestionWhat are the aspiration risk factors, microbiology patterns, and empiric anti-anaerobic use in patients hospitalized with CAP?Study Design And MethodsThis is a secondary analysis of GLIMP, an international, multicenter, point-prevalence study of adults hospitalized with CAP. Patients were stratified into three groups: (1) ACAP, (2) CAP/AspRF+ (CAP with AspRF), and (3) CAP/AspRF- (CAP without AspRF). Data on demographics, comorbidities, microbiological results, and anti-anaerobic antibiotics were analyzed in all groups. Patients were further stratified in severe and nonsevere CAP groups.ResultsWe enrolled 2,606 patients with CAP, of which 193 (7.4%) had ACAP. Risk factors independently associated with ACAP were male, bedridden, underweight, a nursing home resident, and having a history of stroke, dementia, mental illness, and enteral tube feeding. Among non-ACAP patients, 1,709 (70.8%) had CAP/AspRF+ and 704 (29.2%) had CAP/AspRF-. Microbiology patterns including anaerobes were similar between CAP/AspRF-, CAP/AspRF+ and ACAP (0.0% vs 1.03% vs 1.64%). Patients with severe ACAP had higher rates of total gram-negative bacteria (64.3% vs 44.3% vs 33.3%, P = .021) and lower rates of total gram-positive bacteria (7.1% vs 38.1% vs 50.0%, P < .001) when compared with patients with severe CAP/AspRF+ and severe CAP/AspRF-, respectively. Most patients (>50% in all groups) independent of AspRFs or ACAP received specific or broad-spectrum anti-anaerobic coverage antibiotics.InterpretationHospitalized patients with ACAP or CAP/AspRF+ had similar anaerobic flora compared with patients without aspiration risk factors. Gram-negative bacteria were more prevalent in patients with severe ACAP. Despite having similar microbiological flora between groups, a large proportion of CAP patients received anti-anaerobic antibiotic coverage.Copyright © 2020 American College of Chest Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

24 keywords...

hide…