Comparing mini bronchoalveolar lavage and endotracheal aspirate in diagnosing bacterial pneumonia in the intensive care unit

IF 1.7 Q4 INFECTIOUS DISEASES IJID regions Pub Date : 2024-12-16 DOI:10.1016/j.ijregi.2024.100518
Abdul Rehman Azam, Fakhir Raza Haidri, Ali Nadeem, Sumera Imran, Nazia Arain, Maheen Fahim
{"title":"Comparing mini bronchoalveolar lavage and endotracheal aspirate in diagnosing bacterial pneumonia in the intensive care unit","authors":"Abdul Rehman Azam,&nbsp;Fakhir Raza Haidri,&nbsp;Ali Nadeem,&nbsp;Sumera Imran,&nbsp;Nazia Arain,&nbsp;Maheen Fahim","doi":"10.1016/j.ijregi.2024.100518","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Pneumonia is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Timely and accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective treatment, but lower respiratory tract sampling techniques vary in sensitivity and specificity. This study aims to compare the diagnostic accuracy of endotracheal aspirate (ETA) with mini bronchoalveolar lavage (mBAL) in detecting bacterial pneumonia in intubated patients, assessing sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of ETA against mBAL, the gold standard.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted at the ICU of Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT), Karachi, Pakistan, over 7 months. Adult patients on mechanical ventilation with suspected or confirmed pneumonia were included. Both mBAL and ETA samples were collected under strict aseptic conditions.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Out of 120 patients, 112 paired samples were analyzed. ETA exhibited a sensitivity of 81.1%, specificity of 92.1%, PPV of 95.2%, and NPV of 71.4%, with an overall accuracy of 84.8%. The most commonly isolated pathogens were <em>Acinetobacter</em> and <em>Klebsiella</em>. No serious adverse events occurred.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>ETA is a cost-effective and reliable alternative to mBAL for diagnosing bacterial pneumonia in intubated ICU patients, but clinicians should carefully interpret negative results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":73335,"journal":{"name":"IJID regions","volume":"14 ","pages":"Article 100518"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11780946/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IJID regions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772707624001875","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

Pneumonia is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Timely and accurate diagnosis is crucial for effective treatment, but lower respiratory tract sampling techniques vary in sensitivity and specificity. This study aims to compare the diagnostic accuracy of endotracheal aspirate (ETA) with mini bronchoalveolar lavage (mBAL) in detecting bacterial pneumonia in intubated patients, assessing sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of ETA against mBAL, the gold standard.

Methods

A cross-sectional comparative study was conducted at the ICU of Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT), Karachi, Pakistan, over 7 months. Adult patients on mechanical ventilation with suspected or confirmed pneumonia were included. Both mBAL and ETA samples were collected under strict aseptic conditions.

Results

Out of 120 patients, 112 paired samples were analyzed. ETA exhibited a sensitivity of 81.1%, specificity of 92.1%, PPV of 95.2%, and NPV of 71.4%, with an overall accuracy of 84.8%. The most commonly isolated pathogens were Acinetobacter and Klebsiella. No serious adverse events occurred.

Conclusion

ETA is a cost-effective and reliable alternative to mBAL for diagnosing bacterial pneumonia in intubated ICU patients, but clinicians should carefully interpret negative results.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
细支气管肺泡灌洗与气管内抽吸诊断重症监护室细菌性肺炎的比较。
目的:肺炎是重症监护病房(ICU)患者发病和死亡的主要原因。及时准确的诊断是有效治疗的关键,但下呼吸道取样技术的敏感性和特异性各不相同。本研究旨在比较气管内吸入(ETA)与迷你支气管肺泡灌洗(mBAL)对插管患者细菌性肺炎的诊断准确性,评估ETA对mBAL的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值(PPV)和阴性预测值(NPV)。方法:在巴基斯坦卡拉奇信德泌尿外科和移植研究所ICU进行为期7个月的横断面比较研究。包括疑似或确诊肺炎的机械通气成年患者。mBAL和ETA样品均在严格的无菌条件下采集。结果:在120例患者中,分析了112个配对样本。ETA的敏感性为81.1%,特异性为92.1%,PPV为95.2%,NPV为71.4%,总体准确率为84.8%。最常见的分离病原菌为不动杆菌和克雷伯菌。未发生严重不良事件。结论:ETA是诊断ICU插管患者细菌性肺炎的一种经济可靠的替代方法,但临床医生应仔细解释阴性结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
IJID regions
IJID regions Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
64 days
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to ‘Profiles of viral pathogens from individuals with acute respiratory tract infections in northern Tanzania’ [IJID Regions 16 (2025) 100686] Community carriage of methicillin-resistant staphylococci among migrant communities living in Klang Valley, Malaysia Health care worker–reported barriers and potential facilitators of acute lower respiratory infection care deliver for children at Mchinji District Hospital in Malawi Maternal preparedness for uptake of newborn hepatitis B immunoprophylaxis at birth: Implications for preventing mother-to-child transmission in resource-limited settings Adherence to perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis in cancer surgeries: A single-center retrospective study from Oman
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1