[Value of aspiration of tracheal secretions and bronchoalveolar lavage in diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonia in ventilated patients].

Anaesthesiologie und Reanimation Pub Date : 1998-01-01
T Schreiber, J Heroldt, R Gottschall, U Klein
{"title":"[Value of aspiration of tracheal secretions and bronchoalveolar lavage in diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonia in ventilated patients].","authors":"T Schreiber,&nbsp;J Heroldt,&nbsp;R Gottschall,&nbsp;U Klein","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The diagnostic value of endotracheal aspirates with quantitative assessment and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) was investigated in 104 mechanically ventilated patients in an anaesthesiologic/surgical intensive care unit. Patients were either considered as \"pneumonia positive\" (77 patients) according to clinical, radiological or laboratory criteria or \"pneumonia negative\" (27 patients). Using a threshold of 10(5) colony forming units (cfu) per ml for endotracheal aspirates and 10(4) cfu/ml for BAL-fluid, the results were similar for both techniques (sensitivity 74% and 77% respectively; specifity 63%). In our investigation, in 80% of the cases microbial growth was observed in either both or neither of the techniques. Therefore 20% of the patients had positive results in only one of the two diagnostic procedures. As a consequence of the presented study, quantitative assessment of endotracheal aspirates as a cost-effective, low-invasive and simple technique could be helpful in diagnosing nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients. Performance of BAL is indicated in patients with clinical signs of nosocomial pneumonia and negative results in endotracheal aspirates (< 10(5) cfu/ml). Nevertheless, diagnostic uncertainty will remain in about 15% of all cases, even when both techniques are applied. The primary use of invasive bronchoscopic techniques, such as BAL, in diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonia has to be considered critically.</p>","PeriodicalId":76993,"journal":{"name":"Anaesthesiologie und Reanimation","volume":"23 4","pages":"93-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anaesthesiologie und Reanimation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The diagnostic value of endotracheal aspirates with quantitative assessment and bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) was investigated in 104 mechanically ventilated patients in an anaesthesiologic/surgical intensive care unit. Patients were either considered as "pneumonia positive" (77 patients) according to clinical, radiological or laboratory criteria or "pneumonia negative" (27 patients). Using a threshold of 10(5) colony forming units (cfu) per ml for endotracheal aspirates and 10(4) cfu/ml for BAL-fluid, the results were similar for both techniques (sensitivity 74% and 77% respectively; specifity 63%). In our investigation, in 80% of the cases microbial growth was observed in either both or neither of the techniques. Therefore 20% of the patients had positive results in only one of the two diagnostic procedures. As a consequence of the presented study, quantitative assessment of endotracheal aspirates as a cost-effective, low-invasive and simple technique could be helpful in diagnosing nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients. Performance of BAL is indicated in patients with clinical signs of nosocomial pneumonia and negative results in endotracheal aspirates (< 10(5) cfu/ml). Nevertheless, diagnostic uncertainty will remain in about 15% of all cases, even when both techniques are applied. The primary use of invasive bronchoscopic techniques, such as BAL, in diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonia has to be considered critically.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[气管分泌物抽吸及支气管肺泡灌洗对通气患者院内肺炎的诊断价值]。
本文对104例麻醉/外科重症监护病房机械通气患者的气管内吸痰定量评估和支气管肺泡灌洗(BAL)的诊断价值进行了探讨。根据临床、放射学或实验室标准,患者要么被视为“肺炎阳性”(77例),要么被视为“肺炎阴性”(27例)。使用阈值为10(5)菌落形成单位(cfu) /ml气管内吸附剂和10(4)cfu/ml bal液体,两种技术的结果相似(灵敏度分别为74%和77%;specifity 63%)。在我们的调查中,80%的病例在两种技术中或两种技术中都观察到微生物生长。因此,20%的患者在两种诊断程序中只有一种有阳性结果。由于本研究的结果,气管内吸入作为一种低成本、低侵入性和简单的技术的定量评估可能有助于诊断机械通气患者的院内肺炎。BAL的性能适用于有院内肺炎临床症状和气管内吸入结果阴性(< 10(5)cfu/ml)的患者。尽管如此,在所有病例中仍有大约15%的病例存在诊断不确定性,即使这两种技术都应用了。侵入性支气管镜技术(如BAL)在诊断院内肺炎中的主要应用必须予以严格考虑。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
[Regional anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia--pathophysiology and clinical implications]. [Analgesia, sedation and anaesthesia in emergency service]. [The influence of normobaric hyperoxia on hepatic oxygenation--experience with an animal model]. [Perioperative management of a patient with alcaptonuria--a case report]. [Implantable drug pumps for spinal opioid analgesia: technical solutions and problems].
×
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:481959085
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