2021
DOI: 10.1186/s13054-021-03460-5
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ventilator-associated pneumonia in critically ill patients with COVID-19

Abstract: Background Pandemic COVID-19 caused by the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has a high incidence of patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Many of these patients require admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for invasive ventilation and are at significant risk of developing a secondary, ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Objectives To study the incidence of VAP and bacterial lung microbiome composition of ventilated COVID-19 and non-… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

27
241
6
19

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 254 publications
(293 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
27
241
6
19
Order By: Relevance
“…In line with previous works, we found that respiratory bacterial co-infections are quite common in critically ill COVID-19 patients (more than 30% of positive cultures), with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (14.7%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (6.9%) and Staphylococcus aureus (6.5%) the most detected pathogens ( Caméléna et al, 2021 ; Maes et al, 2021 ; Hughes et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…In line with previous works, we found that respiratory bacterial co-infections are quite common in critically ill COVID-19 patients (more than 30% of positive cultures), with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (14.7%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (6.9%) and Staphylococcus aureus (6.5%) the most detected pathogens ( Caméléna et al, 2021 ; Maes et al, 2021 ; Hughes et al, 2020 ).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Therefore, since some patients may have experienced more than one VAP episode, we also cannot exclude an underestimation of the true incidence rate of VAP in critically ill COVID-19 patients. With regard to organisms isolated from deep respiratory specimens in patients with VAP in our series, the higher frequency of Gram-negative bacteria we registered is in line with recent data from other countries [22,26,27].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…There are different reasons that may explain this high incidence rate we registered. On the one hand, a truly increased risk of VAP in COVID-19 patients (which is in line with the high incidence rate of 28 episodes per 1000 ventilatordays registered in a recent UK study and with the high reported prevalence of 58% in a large cohort of 4244 critically ill patients with COVID-19 [22,23]), might be explained by different reasons: (i) a potential increased predisposition to bacterial superinfection, on the top of lung damage caused by COVID-19; (ii) the virus-related immunosuppressive effect with deep lymphopenia; (iii) the potential concomitant anti-inflammatory or immunosuppressive effect of steroids and biologic agents (e.g., anti-IL-6 receptor monoclonal antibodies) [24,25]. On the other hand, supporting instead a possible artefactual increase of the registered VAP incidence rate, we may have included some patients diagnosed with VAP who in reality did not have VAP, since we used a broad definition of VAP that is generally used for enrollment in clinical trials rather than for epidemiological purposes.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Very recently, the OUTCOMEREA network describing clinical and epidemiological features of COVID-19 patients observed that these patients were significantly more likely to develop late-onset (> 7 days) ICU-acquired bloodstream infections compared to non-COVID-19 patients [ 42 ]. Furthermore, COVID-19 patients were found to develop more VAP than patients without COVID-19 despite sharing a similar pulmonary microbiota [ 43 ]. Until recently (i.e., in pre–COVID-19 era), bacteremic SA pneumonia was considered as relatively uncommon despite being associated with high mortality rates [ 39 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%