Re-evaluation of the therapy of severe pneumonia caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae

Cilostazol for the prevention of pneumonia: a systematic review

Background

Pneumonia is a very common disease, especially among the elderly. Various drugs’ preventive effects against pneumonia have been reported. The antiplatelet drug cilostazol is used to prevent pneumonia, but the robustness of its efficacy is unclear. This review estimates the effectiveness of cilostazol for preventing pneumonia in elderly individuals.

Methods

The following databases were searched from the earliest record to January 2016, without language restriction (the secondary search was conducted on February 2017): MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Ichushi-Web. Studies were included if they were published randomized controlled trials investigating the preventive effect of cilostazol on pneumonia in the elderly. The outcome was the incidence of pneumonia.

Results

Two trials were identified that met the search criteria (1423 participants). Both trials compared cilostazol with no antiplatelet in patients with a history of cerebral infarction. A meta-analysis was not performed because of the small number of trials and the heterogeneity of the data. Both trials suggested that cilostazol reduced the incidence of pneumonia (risk ratio [RR] 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.22–0.73 in one trial, RR 0.20; 95% CI 0.06–0.69 in the other) and the recurrence of cerebral infarction (0.43; 0.21–0.90, 0.53; 0.34–0.81, respectively). The quality of evidence provided by the trials was very low, mainly because of the high risk of bias.

Conclusions

It is difficult to draw conclusions on the basis of two trials. Moreover, in the two trials, cilostazol could have reduced the incidence of pneumonia via a reduction of the recurrence of cerebral infarction, which suggests that other antiplatelets could also have the same effects. Stronger evidence is required from large trials assessing the effectiveness of cilostazol for the prevention of pneumonia.

Trial registration

PROSPERO (CRD42016036724).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s41479-018-0046-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Antibiotics for treating community-acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of their condition, people with sickle cell disease are at high risk of developing an acute infection of the pulmonary parenchyma called community-acquired pneumonia. Many different bacteria can cause this infection and antibiotic treatment is generally needed to resolve it. There is no standardized approach to antibiotic therapy and treatment is likely to vary from country to country. Thus, there is a need to identify the efficacy and safety of different antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia. This is an update of a previously published Cochrane Review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches (monotherapy or combined) for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register (01 September 2016), which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearching of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched LILACS (1982 to 01 September 2016), African Index Medicus (1982 to 20 October 2016) and WHO ICT Registry (20 October 2016).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for published or unpublished randomized controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We intended to summarise data by standard Cochrane methodologies, but no eligible randomized controlled trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

We were unable to find any randomized controlled trials on antibiotic treatment approaches for community-acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The updated review was unable to identify randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia. Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the optimum antibiotic treatment for this condition. The trials regarding this issue should be structured and reported according to the CONSORT statement for improving the quality of reporting of efficacy and improved reports of harms in clinical research. Triallists should consider including the following outcomes in new trials: number of days to become afebrile; mortality; onset of pain crisis or complications of sickle cell disease following community-acquired pneumonia; diagnosis; hospitalization (admission rate and length of hospital stay); respiratory failure rate; and number of participants receiving a blood transfusion.There are no trials included in the review and we have not identified any relevant trials up to September 2016. We therefore do not plan to update this review until new trials are published.

Antibiotics for treating community acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of their condition, people with sickle cell disease are at high risk of developing an acute infection of the pulmonary parenchyma called community-acquired pneumonia. Many different bacteria can cause this infection and antibiotic treatment is generally needed to resolve it. There is no standardized approach to antibiotic therapy and treatment is likely to vary from country to country. Thus, there is a need to identify the efficacy and safety of different antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches (monotherapy or combined) for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register (25 May 2012), which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearching of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched LILACS (1982 to 27 April 2012), African Index Medicus (1982 to 27 April 2012) and WHO ICT Registry (27 April 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for published or unpublished randomized controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We intended to summarise data by standard Cochrane Collaboration methodologies, but no eligible randomized controlled trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

We were unable to find any randomized controlled trials on antibiotic treatment approaches for community-acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The updated review was unable to identify randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia. Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the optimum antibiotic treatment for this condition. The trials regarding this issue should be structured and reported according to the CONSORT statement for improving the quality of reporting of efficacy and improved reports of harms in clinical research. Triallists should consider including the following outcomes in new trials: number of days to become afebrile; mortality; onset of pain crisis or complications of SCD following CAP; diagnosis; hospitalisation (admission rate and length of hospital stay); respiratory failure rate; and number of participants receiving a blood transfusion.There are no trials included in the review and we have not identified any relevant trials up to May 2012. We therefore do not plan to update this review until new trials are published.

Outcome of children hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia treated with aqueous penicillin G

OBJECTIVE

To describe the evolution and outcome of children hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia receiving penicillin.

METHODS

A search was carried out for all hospitalized community-acquired pneumonia cases in a 37-month period. Inclusion criteria comprised age >2 months, intravenous penicillin G use at 200,000 IU/kg/day for >48 h and chest x-ray results. Confounders leading to exclusion included underlying debilitating or chronic pulmonary illnesses, nosocomial pneumonia or transference to another hospital. Pneumonia was confirmed if a pulmonary infiltrate or pleural effusion was described by an independent radiologist blind to the clinical information. Data on admission and evolution were entered on a standardized form.

RESULTS

Of 154 studied cases, 123 (80%) and 40 (26%) had pulmonary infiltrate or pleural effusion, respectively. Penicilli was substituted by other antibiotics in 28 (18%) patients, in whom the sole significant decrease was in the frequency of tachypnea from the first to the second day of treatment (86% vs. 50%, p = 0.008). Among patients treated exclusively with penicillin G, fever (46% vs. 26%, p = 0.002), tachypnea (74% vs. 59%, p = 0.003), chest indrawing (29% vs. 13%, p<0.001) and nasal flaring (10% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.001) frequencies significantly decreased from admission to the first day of treatment. Patients treated with other antimicrobial agents stayed longer in the hospital than those treated solely with penicillin G (16 ± 6 vs. 8 ± 4 days, p<0.001, mean difference (95% confidence interval) 8 (6-10)). None of the studied patients died.

CONCLUSION

Penicillin G successfully treated 82% (126/154) of the study group and improvement was marked on the first day of treatment.

Low serum mannose-binding lectin level increases the risk of death due to pneumococcal infection

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have shown associations between low mannose-binding lectin (MBL) level or variant MBL2 genotype and sepsis susceptibility. However, MBL deficiency has not been rigorously defined, and associations with sepsis outcomes have not been subjected to multivariable analysis.

METHODS

We reanalyzed MBL results in a large cohort with use of individual data from 4 studies involving a total of 1642 healthy control subjects and systematically defined a reliable deficiency cutoff. Subsequently, data were reassessed to extend previous MBL and sepsis associations, with adjustment for known outcome predictors. We reanalyzed individual data from 675 patients from 5 adult studies and 1 pediatric study of MBL and severe bacterial infection.

RESULTS

XA/O and O/O MBL2 genotypes had the lowest median MBL concentrations. Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that an MBL cutoff value of 0.5 microg/mL was a reliable predictor of low-producing MBL2 genotypes (sensitivity, 82%; specificity, 82%; negative predictive value, 98%). MBL deficiency was associated with increased likelihood of death among patients with severe bacterial infection (odds ratio, 2.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-3.43). In intensive care unit-based studies, there was a trend toward increased risk of death among MBL-deficient patients (odds ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-2.77) after adjustment for Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Enquiry II score. The risk of death was increased among MBL-deficient patients with Streptococcus pneumoniae infection (odds ratio, 5.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-24.92) after adjustment for bacteremia, comorbidities, and age.

CONCLUSIONS

We defined a serum level for MBL deficiency that can be used with confidence in future studies of MBL disease associations. The risk of death was increased among MBL-deficient patients with severe pneumococcal infection, highlighting the pathogenic significance of this innate immune defence protein.

Severe pneumococcal pneumonia: new strategies for management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Streptococcus pneumoniae is the leading cause of community-acquired pneumonia worldwide and is the most likely causative pathogen in patients with community-acquired pneumonia admitted to the intensive care unit. Bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia is an advanced stage of severe pneumococcal pneumonia. Improvement in the management of bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia has the potential for improving the survival for severe pneumococcal pneumonia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Non-culture methods, especially the Binax urinary antigen test, can increase the diagnostic yield for pneumococcal pneumonia, allowing targeted antimicrobial therapy (specifically penicillin). In-vitro resistance to penicillin has increased over the past decade; however, it has not led to clinical failure when used for pneumococcal pneumonia.

SUMMARY

Hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia should have blood cultures obtained to confirm the possibility of bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia. Based on pharmacodynamic properties, parenteral penicillin remains the drug of choice to treat pneumococcal pneumonia regardless of in-vitro resistance. Combination antimicrobial therapy will likely improve survival of patients with bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia among the subset of critically ill patients.

Antibiotics for treating community acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease

BACKGROUND

As a consequence of their condition, people with sickle cell disease are at high risk of developing an acute infection of the pulmonary parenchyma called community-acquired pneumonia. Many different bacteria can cause this infection and antibiotic treatment is generally needed to resolve it. There is no standardized approach to antibiotic therapy and treatment is likely to vary from country to country. Thus, there is a need to identify the efficacy and safety of different antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches (monotherapy or combined) for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Group's Haemoglobinopathies Trials Register (December 2005), which comprises references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearching of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings. We also searched The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to December 5th, 2005), EMBASE (1974 to December 7th, 2005), and LILACS (1982 to December 2005). Date of most recent search: December 2005

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for published or unpublished randomized controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We intended to summarise data by standard Cochrane Collaboration methodologies, but no eligible randomized controlled trials were identified.

MAIN RESULTS

We were unable to find any randomized controlled trials on antibiotic treatment approaches for community-acquired pneumonia in people with sickle cell disease.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We were unable to identify randomized controlled trials on efficacy and safety of the antibiotic treatment approaches for people with sickle cell disease suffering from community-acquired pneumonia. Randomized controlled trials are needed to establish the optimum antibiotic treatment for this condition.