CAP

Key clinical pearls in the medical management of hospitalized patients with coronavirus (Covid-19) infection

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

First, a shout-out to dedicated healthcare workers everywhere who have selflessly given of themselves to care for the sick during this pandemic. Thank you! Together, I know we will get through it!

Although our understanding of Covid-19 infection is far from complete, in the spirit of clarity and brevity of my posts on Pearls4Peers, here are some key points I have gleaned from review of existing literature and the CDC that may be useful as we care for our hospitalized patients with suspected or confirmed Covid-19 infection.

  • Isolation precautions.1 Per CDC, follow a combination of airborne (particularly when aerosol generating procedures is anticipated, including nebulizer treatment) and contact precaution protocols. Routinely use masks or respirators, such as N-95s (subject to local availability and policy) and eye protection. Don gowns (subject to local availability and policy) and gloves and adhere to strict hand hygiene practices.

 

  • Diagnostic tests1-9
    • Laboratory tests. Routine admission labs include CBC, electrolytes, coagulation panels and liver and renal tests. Other frequently reported labs include LDH, C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin. Testing for high sensitivity troponin I has also been performed in some patients, presumably due to concern over ischemic cardiac injury or myocarditis.2 Check other labs as clinically indicated.
    • Chest radiograph/CT chest. One or both have been obtained in virtually all reported cases with CT having higher sensitivity for detection of lung abnormalities.
    • EKG. Frequency of checking EKGs not reported in many published reports thought 1 study reported “acute cardiac injury” in some patients, based in part on EKG findings.4 Suspect we will be checking EKGs in many patients, particularly those who are older or are at risk of heart disease.
    • Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS). This relatively new technology appears promising in Covid-19 infections, including in rapid assessment of the severity of pneumonia or ARDS at presentation and tracking the evolution of the disease. 9 Don’t forget to disinfect the probe between uses!

 

  • Treatment 1-8
    • Specific therapies are not currently available for treatment of Covid-19 infections, but studies are underway.
    • Supportive care includes IV fluids, 02 supplementation and nutrition, as needed. Plenty of emotional support for patients and their families will likely be needed during these times.
    • Antibiotics have been used in the majority of reported cases, either on admission or during hospitalization when superimposed bacterial pneumonia or sepsis could not be excluded.
      • Prescribe antibiotics against common community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) pathogens, including those associated with post-viral/influenza pneumonia such as Streptococcus pneumoniae (eg, ceftriaxone), and Staphylococcus aureus (eg, vancomycin or linezolid if MRSA is suspected) when concurrent CAP is suspected.
      • Prescribe antibiotics against common hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) (eg, vancomycin plus cefepime) when HAP is suspected.
    • Corticosteroids should be avoided because of the potential for prolonging viral replication, unless indicated for other reasons such as COPD exacerbation or septic shock. 1
    • Monitor for deterioration in clinical status even when your hospitalized patient has relatively minor symptoms. This is because progression to lower respiratory tract disease due to Covid-19 often develops during the 2nd week of illness (average 9 days).
    • ICU transfer may be necessary in up to 30% of hospitalized patients due to complications such as ARDS, secondary infections, and multi-organ failure.

 

Again, thank you for caring for the sick and be safe! Feel free to leave comments or questions.

 

 Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

References

  1. CDC. Interim clinical guidance for management of patients with confirmed coronavirus disease (COVID-19). https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/clinical-guidance-management-patients.html
  2. Ruan Q, Yang K, Wang W, Jiang L, et al. Clinical predictors of mortality due to COVID-19 based on analysis of data of 150 patients with Wuhan, China. Intensive Care Med 2020. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00134-020-05991-x
  3. Holshue ML, BeBohlt C, Lindquist S, et al. First case of 2019 novel coronavirus in the United States. N Engl J Med 2020;382:929-36. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2001191
  4. Huang C, Wang Y, Li Xingwang, et al. Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China. Lancet 2020;395:497-506. https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5.pdf
  5. Young BE, Ong SWX, Kalimuddin S, et al. Epideomiologic features and clinical course of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 Singapore. JAMA, March 3, 2020. Doi.10.1001/jama.2020.3204 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32125362
  6. Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, et al. Epidemiological and clinical chacteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study. Lancet 2020;395:507-13. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30211-7/fulltext
  7. Guan W, Ni Z, Hu Y, et al. Clinical characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 in China. N Engl Med 2020, Feb 28, 2020. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2002032
  8. Zhang J, Zhou L, Yang Y, et al. Therapeutic and triage strategies for 2019 novel coronavirus disease in fever clinics. Lancet 2020;8: e11-e12. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30071-0/fulltext 9.
  9. Peng QY, Wang XT, Zhang LN, et al. Findings of lung ultrasonography of novel corona virus pneumonia during the 2019-2020 epidemic. Intensive Care Med 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-05996-
Key clinical pearls in the medical management of hospitalized patients with coronavirus (Covid-19) infection

When should I consider a switch to oral antibiotics and discharge from hospital in my recently admitted elderly patient with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP)?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

A frequently used validated set of clinical stability criteria in patients with CAP and supported by the 2019 ATS/IDSA CAP guidelines consists of a temperature ≤37.8 ᵒC (100.0 ᵒF) AND no more than 1 CAP-related sign of clinical instability as listed below: 1-3

  • Heart rate >100/min
  • Systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg
  • Respiration rate >24 breaths/min
  • Arterial oxygen saturation <90% or Pa02<60 mm Hg (room air)

Using these criteria, the risk of clinical deterioration serious enough to necessitate transfer to an intensive care unit may be 1% or less, 1 while failure to achieve clinical stability within 5 days is associated with higher mortality and worse clinical outcome. 2 The median time to clinical stability (as defined) for CAP treatment is 3 days.1  

A 2016 randomized-controlled trial involving patients hospitalized with CAP found that implementation of above clinical stability criteria was associated with safe discontinuation of antibiotics after a minimum of 5 days of appropriate therapy. 3 

Potential limitations of the above study include heavy use of quinolones (80%), underrepresentation of patients with severe CAP (Pneumonia Risk Index, PSI, V), and exclusion of nursing home residents, immunosuppressed patients, those with chest tube, or infection caused by less common organisms, such as Staphylococcus aureus or Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Lack of clinical stability after 5 days of CAP treatment should prompt evaluation for complications of pneumonia (eg, empyema, lung abscess), infection due to  organisms resistant to selected antibiotics, or an alternative source of infection/inflammatory/poor response. 2

References

  1. Halm, EA, Fine MJ, Marrie TJ, et al. Time to clinical stability in patients hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia: implications for practice guidelines. JAMA 1998;279:279:1452-57. https://reference.medscape.com/medline/abstract/9600479
  2. Metlay JP, Waterer GW, Long AC, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2019;200:e45-e67. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31573350
  3. Uranga A, Espana PP, Bilbao A, et al. Duration of antibiotic treatment in community-acquired pneumonia. A multicenter randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176:1257-65. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27455166/
When should I consider a switch to oral antibiotics and discharge from hospital in my recently admitted elderly patient with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP)?

What changes should I consider in my treatment of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in light of the 2019 guidelines of the American Thoracic society (ATS) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Compared to 2007,1 the 2019 ATS/IDSA guidelines2 propose changes in at least 4 major areas of CAP treatment in inpatients, with 2 “Do’s” and 2 “Dont’s”:

  • Do select empiric antibiotics based on severity of CAP and risk factors for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (see related pearl on P4P)
  • Do routinely treat CAP patients who test positive for influenza with standard CAP antibiotics
  • Don’t routinely provide anaerobic coverage in aspiration pneumonia (limit it to empyema and lung abscess) (see related pearl on P4P)
  • Don’t routinely treat CAP with adjunctive corticosteroids in the absence of refractory shock

β-lactam plus macrolide is recommended for both non-severe and severe CAP.  β-lactam plus respiratory fluoroquinolone is an alternative regime in severe CAP, though not endorsed as strongly as β-lactam plus macrolide therapy (low quality of evidence).  Management per CAP severity summarized below:

  • Non-severe CAP
    • β-lactam (eg, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, ampicillin-sulbactam and newly-added ceftaroline) plus macrolide (eg, azithromycin, clarithromycin) OR respiratory fluoroquinolone (eg, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin)
    • In patients at risk of MRSA or P. aeruginosa infection (eg, prior isolation of respective pathogens, hospitalization and parenteral antibiotics in the last 90 days or locally validated risk factors—HCAP has been retired), obtain cultures/PCR
    • Hold off on MRSA or P. aeruginosa coverage unless culture/PCR results return positive.
  • Severe CAP
    • β-lactam plus macrolide OR β-lactam plus respiratory fluoroquinolone (see above)
    • In patients at risk of MRSA or P. aeruginosa infection (see above), obtain cultures/PCR
    • Add MRSA coverage (eg, vancomycin or linezolid) and/or P. aeruginosa coverage (eg, cefepime, ceftazidime, piperacillin-tazobactam, meropenem, imipenem) if deemed at risk (see above) while waiting for culture/PCR results

Duration of antibiotics is for a minimum of 5 days for commonly-targeted pathogens and a minimum of 7 days for MRSA or P. aeruginosa infections, irrespective of severity or rapidity in achieving clinical stability.

For patients who test positive for influenza and have CAP, standard antibacterial regimen should be routinely added to antiinfluenza treatment.

For patients suspected of aspiration pneumonia, anaerobic coverage (eg, clindamycin, ampicillin-sulbactam, piperacillin-tazobactam) is NOT routinely recommended in the absence of lung abscess or empyema.

Corticosteroids are NOT routinely recommended for non-severe (high quality of evidence) or severe (moderate quality of evidence) CAP in the absence of refractory septic shock.

Related pearls on P4P:

2019 CAP guidelines on diagnostics:                                        https://pearls4peers.com/2020/02/14/what-changes-should-i-consider-in-my-diagnostic-approach-to-hospitalized-patients-with-community-acquired-pneumonia-cap-in-light-of-the-2019-guidelines-of-the-american-thoracic-society-ats-and-inf/ 

Anerobic coverage of aspiration pneumonia: https://pearls4peers.com/2019/07/31/should-i-routinely-select-antibiotics-with-activity-against-anaerobes-in-my-patients-with-presumed-aspiration-pneumonia/

References

  1. Mandell LA, Wunderink RG, Anzueto A. Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society Consensus Guidelines on the Management guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2007;44:S27-72. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17278083
  2. Metlay JP, Waterer GW, Long AC, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2019;200:e45-e67. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31573350

 

What changes should I consider in my treatment of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in light of the 2019 guidelines of the American Thoracic society (ATS) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)?

What changes should I consider in my diagnostic approach to hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in light of the 2019 guidelines of the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Compared to 2007,1 the 2019 ATS/IDSA guidelines2 have 2 major “Do’s” and 2 major “Dont’s” in the diagnostic approach to CAP in hospitalized patients:

  • DO order sputum and blood cultures in patients empirically treated for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa—in addition to those with severe CAP as in 2007.  
  • DO order rapid influenza molecular assay—in preference to antigen test— when influenza viruses are circulating in community, irrespective of pneumonia severity
  • DON’T routinely order urine antigens for pneumococcal or Legionella antigens, except in severe CAP or in the presence of suggestive epidemiological factors (eg. Legionella outbreak, recent travel)
  • DON’t routinely order serum procalcitonin to determine need for initial antibacterial therapy

Patients at risk of MRSA or P. aeruginosa include those with prior infection with the same pathogens as well as those with hospitalization and treated with parenteral antibiotics—in or out of the hospital— in the last 90 days; HCAP is no longer recognized as an entity.

The definition of severe CAP is unchanged: 1 of 2 major criteria (septic shock or respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation) or 3 or more of the following minor criteria or findings listed below:

  • Clinical
    • Respiratory rate ≥30 breath/min
    • Hypotension requiring aggressive fluid resuscitation
    • Hypothermia (core temperature <36 ᵒC, 96.8 ᵒF)
    • Confusion/disorientation
  • Radiographic 
    • Multilobar infiltrates
  • Laboratory 
    • Leukopenia (WBC <4,000/ul)
    • Thrombocytopenia (platelets <100,000/ul)
    • BUN ≥20 mg/dl
    • Pa02/FI02 ratio ≤250

Keep in mind that these guidelines focus on adults who are not immunocompromised or had recent foreign travel and are often based on expert opinion but low or very low quality evidence due to the dearth of properly designed studies.2 

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that the urine Legionella antigen only tests for L. pneumophila type I, with an overall sensitivity ranging from 45% to 100%!3,4

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

 

References

  1. Mandell LA, Wunderink RG, Anzueto A. Infectious Disease Society of America/American Thoracic Society Consensus Guidelines on the Management guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults. Clin Infect Dis 2007;44:S27-72. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17278083
  2. Metlay JP, Waterer GW, Long AC, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2019;200:e45-e67. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31573350
  3. Blazquez RM, Espinosa FJ, Martinez-Toldos CM, et al. Sensitivity of urinary antigen test in relation to clinical severity in a large outbreak of Legionella pneumonia in Spain. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2005;24:488-91. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15997369
  4. Marlow E, Whelan C. Legionella pneumonia and use of the Legionella urinary antigen test. J Hosp Med 2009;4:E1-E2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19301376

Disclosures: The listed questions and answers are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of Mercy Hospital-St. Louis or its affiliate healthcare centers, Mass General Hospital, Harvard Medical School or its affiliated institutions. Although every effort has been made to provide accurate information, the author is far from being perfect. The reader is urged to verify the content of the material with other sources as deemed appropriate and exercise clinical judgment in the interpretation and application of the information provided herein. No responsibility for an adverse outcome or guarantees for a favorable clinical result is assumed by the author. Thank you!

 

 

What changes should I consider in my diagnostic approach to hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in light of the 2019 guidelines of the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)?

How long should I treat my patient with urinary tract infection and E. Coli bacteremia?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Although traditionally 7 to 14 days of antibiotic therapy has been recommended for Gram-negative bacteremia, more recent studies suggest that shorter antibiotic treatment courses are as effective as longer treatments for a variety of infections, particuarly those due to Enterobacteriaceae (eg, E. Coli, Klebsiella sp) in patients with low severity illness (1). 

Keep in mind that short course therapy may not apply to all patients with UTI and bacteremia, such as those with prostatitis (not included in the most recent study [1,2]), which requires longer course of antibiotics (3)

 
A 2019 randomized-controlled study involving primarily patients with bacteremia caused by E. Coli or Klebsiella sp. (~75%) with most cases associated with UTI (~70%) found that 7 days was as effective as 14 days of treatment in hemodynamically stable patients who are afebrile for at least 48 hours without an ongoing focus of infection (1). More specifically, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the rates of relapse of bacteremia or mortality at 14 or 28 days.

 
An accompanying editorial concluded that “7 days of treatment may be sufficient for hospitalized, non-critically ill patients with Gram-negative bacteremia and with signs of early response to treatment” (4)  Again, the accent should be on hemodynamically stable patients who respond rapidly to treatment. 

 
Bonus Pearl: While on the subject of shorter course antibiotic therapy, a 2016 “mantra” article nicely summarizes more recent suggestions for common infectious disease conditions (5). Obviously, clinical judgment should be exercised in all cases.
• Community-acquired pneumonia                               3-5 days (vs 7-10 days)
• Nosocomial pneumonia                                                 8 days or less (vs 10-15 days)
• Pyelonephritis                                                                  5-7 days (vs 10-14 days)
• Intraabdominal infection                                             4 days (vs 10 days)
• COPD acute exacerbation                                             5 days or less (vs >6 days)
• Acute bacterial sinusitis                                               5 days (vs 10 days)
• Cellulitis                                                                            5-6 days (vs 10 days)

 

 

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References
1. Yahav D, Franceschini E, Koppel F, et al. Seven versus 14 days of antibiotic therapy for uncomplicated Gram-negative bacteremia: A noninferiority randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis 2019; 69:1091-8. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/69/7/1091/5237874       2. Yahav D, Mussini C, Leibovici L, et al. Reply to “Should we treat bacteremic prostatitis for 7 days”.  Clin Infect Dis 2010;70:751-3. DOI:10:1093/cid/ciz393.

3.  De Greef J, Doyen L, Hnrard S, et al. Should we treat bacteremic prostatitis for 7 days? Clin Infect Dis 2020;70:351https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/70/2/351/5488067?redirectedFrom=fulltext
4. Daneman D, Fowler RA. Shortening antibiotic treatment durations for bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 2019;69:1099-1100. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/69/7/1099/5237877?redirectedFrom=fulltext
5. Spellberg B. The new antibiotic mantra: “ Shorter is better”. JAMA Intern Med 2016;176:1254-55. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2536180

How long should I treat my patient with urinary tract infection and E. Coli bacteremia?

My patient with diabetes mellitus is now admitted with pneumonia. Does diabetes increase the risk of pneumonia requiring hospitalization?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

The weight of the evidence to date suggests that diabetes mellitus (DM) does increase the risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization.1-3

A large population-based study involving over 30,000 patients found an adjusted relative risk (RR) of hospitalization with pneumonia of 1.26 (95% C.I 1.2-1.3) among patients with DM compared to non-diabetics.  Of note, the risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization was significantly higher in type 1 as well as type 2 DM and among patients whose A1C level was ≥9.1  Another population-based study found a high prevalence of DM (25.6%) in patients hospitalized with CAP, more than double that in the population studied.2  A 2016 meta-analysis of observational studies also found increased incidence of respiratory tract infections among patients with diabetes (OR 1.35, 95% C.I. 1.3-1.4).

Not only does DM increase the risk of pneumonia-related hospitalization, but it also appears to adversely affect its outcome with increased in-hospital mortality.2 Among patients with type 2 DM,  excess mortality has also been reported at 30 days, 90 days and 1 year following hospitalization for pneumonia. 4,5 More specifically, compared to controls with CAP, 1 year mortality of patients with DM was 30% (vs 17%) in 1 study. 4

Potential reasons for the higher incidence of pneumonia among patients with DM include increased risk of aspiration (eg, in the setting of gastroparesis, decreased cough reflex), impaired immunity (eg, chemotaxis, intracellular killing), pulmonary microangiopathy and coexisting morbidity. 1,3,5,6

Bonus Pearl: Did you know that worldwide DM has reached epidemic levels, such that if DM were a nation, it would surpass the U.S. as the 3rd most populous country! 7

If you liked this post, sign up under MENU and catch future fresh pearls straight into your mailbox!

References

  1. Kornum JB, Thomsen RW, RUS A, et al. Diabetes, glycemic control, and risk of hospitalization with pneumonia. A population-based case-control study. Diabetes Care 2008;31:1541-45. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17595354
  2. Martins M, Boavida JM, Raposo JF, et al. Diabetes hinders community-acquired pneumonia outcomes in hospitalized patients. BMJ Open Diabetes Research and Care 2016;4:e000181.doi:10.1136/bmjdrc-2015000181. https://drc.bmj.com/content/4/1/e000181
  3. Abu-Ahour W, Twells L, Valcour J, et al. The association between diabetes mellitus and incident infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. BMJ Open Diabetes Research and Care 2017;5:e000336. https://drc.bmj.com/content/5/1/e000336. 
  4. Falcone M, Tiseo G, Russo A, et al. Hospitalization for pneumonia is associated with decreased 1-year survival in patients with type 2 diabetes. Results from a prospective cohort study. Medicine 2016;95:e2531. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26844461
  5. Kornum JB, Thomsen RW, Rus A, et al. Type 2 diabetes and pneumonia outcomes. A population-based cohort study. Diabetes Care 2007;30:2251-57. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17595354
  6. Koziel H, Koziel MJ. Pulmonary complications of diabetes mellitus. Pneumonia. Infect Dis Clin North Am 1995;9:65-96. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7769221
  7. Zimmet PZ. Diabetes and its drivers: the largest epidemic in human history? Clinical Diabetes and Endocrinology 2017;3:1 https://clindiabetesendo.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40842-016-0039-3  

 

My patient with diabetes mellitus is now admitted with pneumonia. Does diabetes increase the risk of pneumonia requiring hospitalization?

My patient with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) will be going home on an oral antibiotic. Is there a significant difference in the risk of Clostridium difficile infection among the usual CAP antibiotics?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , Leave a comment

Not all antibiotics are equal in their risk of CDI. Among the common antibiotics used for respiratory tract infections, doxycycline appears to be the least likely to be associated with CDI. 

 

A population-based case-control study of community-acquired CDI found that while recent exposure increased the risk of CDI for fluoroquinolones, macrolides, cephalosporins, sulfonamides and trimethoprim and penicillins, the risk of CDI with tetracycline use was not increased (1).  Similar findings (with the exception of sulfonamides also appearing risk-neutral) have been reported by others (2). 

 

Among patients receiving ceftriaxone, receipt of doxycycline has been associated with protection against development of CDI (3).  A 2018 systematic review and meta-analysis also concluded that tetracyclines were associated with a decreased risk of CDI; OR 0.55 (95% CI 0,40-0.75) for doxycycline alone (4). 

 

The most likely explanation for why doxycycline may be associated with lower risk of CDI is its in vitro activity against anaerobes, including C. difficile. Additionally, because of its ability to inhibit protein synthesis, doxycycline may attenuate C. difficile toxin production. Its high bioavailability and maximal absorption from the upper gastrointestinal tract may also mitigate its impact on gut flora, further reducing its risk of CDI (3). 

 

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References
1. Delaney JAC, Dial S, Barkun A et al. Antimicrobial drugs and community-acquired Clostridium difficile-associated disease-UK. Emerg Infect Dis 2007:13;761-63. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2738472
2. Kuntz JL, Chirchilles EA, et al. Incidence of and risk factors for community-associated Clostridium difficile infection : A nested case-control study. BMC Infect Dis 2011;11:194. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3154181/ 
3. Doernberg SB, Winston LG, Deck DH, et al. Does doxycycline protect against development of Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infec Dis 2012;44:615-20. https://www.academia.edu/7814406/Does_Doxycycline_Protect_Against_Development_of_Clostridium_difficile_Infection
4. Tariq R, Cho J, Kapoor S, et al. Low risk of primary Clostridium difficile infection with tetracyclines: a systematic review and metanalysis. Clin Infect Dis 2018; 766:514-27. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/66/4/514/4161552 

If you liked this post, sign up under MENU and get future pearls straight into your mailbox!

My patient with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) will be going home on an oral antibiotic. Is there a significant difference in the risk of Clostridium difficile infection among the usual CAP antibiotics?

How should I interpret the growth of “normal respiratory flora” from sputum of my patient with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP)?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Since the primary reason for obtaining a sputum culture in a patient with pneumonia is to sample the lower respiratory tract, you should first verify that the sputum was “adequate” by reviewing the gram stain. Absence of neutrophils (unless the patient is neutropenic) with or without epithelial cells on gram stain of sputum suggests that it may not be an adequate sample (ie, likely saliva)1, and therefore growth of normal respiratory flora (NRF) should not be surprising in this setting.  

Other potential explanations for NRF on sputum culture in patients with CAP include:2-5

  • Delay in sputum processing with possible overgrowth of oropharyngeal flora.
  • Pneumonia caused by pathogens that do not grow on standard sputum culture media (eg, atypical organisms, viruses, anaerobes).
  • Pneumonia caused by potential pathogens such as as Streptococcus mitis and Streptococcus anginosus group that may be part of the NRF.
  • Initiation of antibiotics prior to cultures (eg, in pneumococcal pneumonia).

Of note, since 2010, several studies have shown that over 50% of patients with CAP do not have an identifiable cause.3 So, growing NRF from sputum of patients with CAP appears to be common.

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

References

  1. Wong LK, Barry AL, Horgan SM. Comparison of six different criteria for judging the acceptability of sputum specimens. J Clin Microbiol 1982;16:627-631. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7153311
  2. Donowitz GR. Acute pneumonia. In Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s Principles and Practice of Infectious Diseases (2010). Churchill Livingstone, pp 891-916.
  3. Musher DM, Abers MS, Bartlett JG. Evolving understanding of the causes of pneumonia in adults, with special attention to the role of pneumococcus. Clin Infect Dis 2017;65: 1736-44. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29028977
  4. Abers MS, Musher DM. The yield of sputum culture in bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia after initiation of antibiotics. Clin Infect Dis 2014; 58:1782. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24604901
  5. Bartlett JG, Gorbach SL, Finegold SM. The bacteriology of aspiration pneumonia. Bartlett JG, Gorbach SL, Finegold SM. Am J Med 1974;56:202-7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4812076
How should I interpret the growth of “normal respiratory flora” from sputum of my patient with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP)?

The urine antigen for Legionella in my patient with severe community-associated pneumonia is negative. How well does it rule out Legionella pneumonia?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , Leave a comment

Not as well as you might think!

Legionella urine antigens are 60%-80% sensitive (>99% specific) for detecting L. pneumophila serogroup 1 which accounts for about 70%-80% of Legionnaire’s disease (LD) in the US1; there are at least 15 serogroups.2 So as many as 40% or more LD may be missed by urine antigen testing alone. 2 

Urine antigen can be excreted as early 3 days after the onset of symptoms and can persist for >300 days which may present a problem in diagnosing a current illness in patients with recurrent pneumonia. 2 One study reported lowest sensitivity (80%) for antigen testing during days 4 to 7 days of symptoms.3

Other means of looking for Legionella include culture of respiratory samples for L. pneumophila which can detect all types of Legionella species (sensitivity 20%-80%) but has a lengthy turnaround time. Paired antibody testing may also be performed (sensitivity 70%-80%) in undiagnosed cases of severe pneumonia. 1

Take home point: Don’t depend totally on urine antigen testing to rule out LD.

Final fun fact: Did you know that legionellae survive in the aquatic environment by parasitizing free-living protozoa?

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to  catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

References

  1. CDC. Legionellosis: United States, 2000-2009. MMWR 2011;60:1083-86. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6032a3.htm
  2. Fields BS, Benson RF, Besser RE. Legionella and Legionnaire’s disease: 25 years of investigation. Clin Micro Rev 2002;15:506-26. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12097254  
  3. Kohler RB, Zimmerman SE, Wilson E, et al. Onset and duration of urinary antigen excretion in Legionnaire’s disease. J Clin Microbiol 20:605-7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC271393
The urine antigen for Legionella in my patient with severe community-associated pneumonia is negative. How well does it rule out Legionella pneumonia?

How well does procalcitonin distinguish bacterial from viral causes of community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalized patients?

FA Manian MD, MPH, , , , , , Leave a comment

Not extremely well! Although a recent multicenter prospective study in adult hospitalized patients reported that the median procalcitonin (PCT) concentration was significantly lower for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) caused by viral compared to bacterial pathogens, normal PCT values at  <0.1 ug/ml and <0.25 ug/ml  were also found in 12.4% and 23.1% of typical bacterial cases, respectively1. 

This means that we could potentially miss about a quarter of CAP cases due to typical bacterial causes if we use the <0.25 ug/ml threshold (<0.20 is ug/ml has often  been used to exclude sepsis2). Based on the results of these and another study3, no threshold for PCT can reliably distinguish bacterial from viral etiologies of CAP.4  Clinical context is essential in interpreting PCT levels!

Can PCT distinguish Legionella from other atypical bacterial causes of CAP (eg, caused by Mycoplasma or Chlamydophila)? The answer is “maybe”! Legionella was associated with higher PCT levels compared to  Mycoplasma and Chlamydophila in one study1, but not in another3. 

For a related pearl on P4P go to https://pearls4peers.com/2017/07/01/should-i-order-serum-procalcitonin-on-my-patient-with-suspected-infection   

Liked this post? Download the app on your smart phone and sign up below to catch future pearls right into your inbox, all for free!

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

 

References

  1. Self WH, Balk RA, Grijalva CG, et al. Procalcitonin as a marker of etiology in adults hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2017;65:183-90. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28407054
  2. Meisner M. Update on procalcitonin measurements. Ann Lab Med 2014;34:263-73.
  3. Krüger S, Ewig S, Papassotiriou J, et al. Inflammatory parameters predict etiologic patterns but do not allow for individual prediction of etiology in patients with CAP-Results from the German competence network CAPNETZ. Resp Res 2009;10:65. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2714042/pdf/1465-9921-10-65.pdf
  4. Bergin SP, Tsalik EL. Procalcitonin: the right answer but to which question? Clin Infect Dis 2017; 65:191-93. https://academic.oup.com/cid/article-abstract/65/2/191/3605416/Procalcitonin-The-Right-Answer-but-to-Which?redirectedFrom=fulltext
How well does procalcitonin distinguish bacterial from viral causes of community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalized patients?