4.7 Article

Ventilator-Associated Tracheobronchitis in a Mixed Surgical and Medical ICU Population

Journal

CHEST
Volume 139, Issue 3, Pages 513-518

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1378/chest.10-1336

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Barnes-Jewish Hospital Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) is considered an intermediate condition between bacterial airway colonization and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). The purpose of this prospective cohort study was to further characterize VAT in terms of incidence, etiology, and impact on patient outcomes. Methods: Patients intubated for > 48 h in the surgical and medical ICUs of Barnes-Jewish Hospital were screened daily for the development of VAT and VAP over 1 year. Patients were followed until hospital discharge or death, and patient demographics, causative pathogens, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Results: A total of 28 patients with VAT and 83 with YAP were identified corresponding to frequencies of 1.4% and 4.0%, respectively. NAP was more common in surgical than medical ICU patients (5.3% Vs 2.3%; P < .001), but the occurrence of VAT was similar between surgical and medical patients (1.3% vs 1.5%; P = .845). VAT progressed to VAP in nine patients (32.1%) despite antibiotic therapy. There was no significant difference in hospital mortality between patients with YAP and VAT (19.3% vs 21.4%; P = .789). VAT was caused by a multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogen in nine cases (32.1%). Conclusion: VAT occurs less commonly than VAP but at a similar incidence in medical and surgical ICU patients. VAT frequently progressed to VAP, and patients diagnosed with VAT had similar outcomes to those diagnosed with VAP, suggesting that antimicrobial therapy is appropriate for VAT. VAT is also frequently caused by MDR organisms, and this should be taken into account when choosing antimicrobial therapy. CHEST 2011; 139(3):513-518

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available