Aspiration Risk Factors, Microbiology, and Empiric Antibiotics for Patients Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

Marin-Corral J, Pascual-Guardia S, Amati F, Aliberti S, Masclans JR, Soni N, Rodriguez A, Sibila O, Sanz F, Sotgiu G, Anzueto A, Dimakou K, Petrino R, van de Garde E, Restrepo MI, GLIMP investigators. Aspiration Risk Factors, Microbiology, and Empiric Antibiotics for Patients Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia. Chest. 2021 Jan 1; 159(1):58-72.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Aspiration 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 QUESTION: What are the aspiration risk factors, microbiology patterns, and empiric anti-anaerobic use in patients hospitalized with CAP? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This 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. RESULTS: We 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. INTERPRETATION: Hospitalized 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.