Selective decontamination of the digestive tract: a life saver

Aspiration and the Risk of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a major concern in the intensive care unit. It is estimated that the risk of developing VAP may be as high as 1% per ventilated day, and the attributable mortality approaches 50% in some series. A growing body of evidence implicates the role of microaspiration of contaminated oropharyngeal and perhaps gastroesophageal secretions into the airways as an integral step in the pathogenesis of VAP. In patients who have been intubated and mechanically ventilated for >72 hours, the majority of VAP is caused by enteric gram-negative organisms, presumably of gastrointestinal origin. As a result, strategies designed to minimize the risk of these contaminated secretions into the normally sterile airways are of paramount importance in terms of VAP prevention. This review highlights the important etiological role of the gut in the development of VAP and also discusses the evidence behind interventions that may modulate the risk of both aspiration and subsequent VAP.

The pros, cons, and unknowns of search and destroy for carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae

Antibiotic drug discovery has not kept pace with the development of microbial resistance to these agents. There are ever increasing reports where the causative agents of serious infections are multi-drug resistant and in some cases resistant to all known antibiotics. The emergence and spread of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae has heightened awareness regarding antibiotic stewardship programs and infection prevention and control measures. There has been much controversy regarding the utility of the "search and destroy" strategy to prevent the spread of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. These controversies center on screening and management of carriers, including decontamination and isolation. It is however clear that a functional infection prevention and control program is fundamental to any strategy that serves to address the spread of microbes within a healthcare facility.

Impact of selective decontamination of the digestive tract on multiple organ dysfunction syndrome: systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

We examined the impact of selective decontamination of the digestive tract on multiple organ dysfunction syndrome.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, previous meta-analyses, and meetings proceedings.

STUDY SELECTION

We included all randomized trials comparing both oropharyngeal and intestinal administration of antibiotics in selective decontamination of the digestive tract with or without a parenteral component, with placebo or standard therapy used in the controls.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers independently applied selection criteria, performed quality assessment, and extracted the data. The primary end point was the number of patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome developing during intensive care unit stay. Secondary end points were overall mortality and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome-related mortality. Odds ratios were pooled with the random effect model.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We identified seven randomized trials including 1270 patients. Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome was found in 132 of 637 patients (20.7%) in the selective decontamination of the digestive tract group and in 219 of 633 patients (34.6%) in the control group (odds ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.74; p < .001). Overall mortality for selective decontamination of the digestive tract vs. control patients was 119 of 637 (18.7%) and 145 of 633 (22.9%), respectively, demonstrating a nonsignificant reduction in the odds of death (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-1.32; p = .41). In five studies including 472 patients, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome-related mortality was demonstrated in 31 of 239 (13%) patients in selective decontamination of the digestive tract group and 37 of 233 (15.9%) in the controls (odds ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-1.41; p = .54).

CONCLUSIONS

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract reduces the number of patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. Mortality was not significantly reduced, probably because of the small sample size.

Impact of Selective Decontamination of the Digestive Tract on Carriage and Infection Due to Gram-Negative and Gram-Positive Bacteria: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

Meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials of selective digestive decontamination have clinical outcome measures, mainly pneumonia and mortality. This meta-analysis has a microbiological endpoint and explores the impact of selective digestive decontamination on Gram-negative and Gram-positive carriage and severe infections. We searched electronic databases, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, previous meta-analyses and conference proceedings with no language restrictions. We included randomised controlled trials which compared the selective digestive decontamination protocol with no treatment or placebo. Three reviewers independently applied selection criteria, performed the quality assessment and extracted the data. The outcome measures were carriage and severe infection due to Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. Odds ratios were pooled with the random effect model. Fifty-four randomised controlled trials comprising 9473 patients were included; 4672 patients received selective digestive decontamination and 4801 were controls. Selective digestive decontamination significantly reduced oropharyngeal carriage (odds ratio [OR] 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07 to 0.23), rectal carriage (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.31), overall infection (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.28), lower respiratory tract infection (OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.20) and bloodstream infection (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.67) due to Gram-negative bacteria. Reduction in Gram-positive carriage was not significant. Gram-positive lower airway infections were significantly reduced (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.78). Gram-positive bloodstream infections were not significantly increased (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.41). The association of parenteral and enteral antimicrobials was superior to enteral antimicrobials in reducing carriage and severe infections due to Gram-negative bacteria. This meta-analysis confirms that selective digestive decontamination mainly targets Gram-negative bacteria; it does not show a significant increase in Gram-positive infection.

Reducing susceptibility to bacteremia after experimental burn injury: a role for selective decontamination of the digestive tract

We proposed that selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) initiated after experimental burn injury would decrease myocardial inflammation and dysfunction after a second insult such as septic challenge. Rats were divided into eight experimental groups. Groups included sham burn plus sham sepsis, burn alone, sepsis alone, and burn plus sepsis given either water by oral gavage for 5 days after burn (or sham burn) or given oral antibiotics (polymyxin E, 15 mg; tobramycin, 6 mg; 5-flucytosin, 100 mg given by oral gavage, 2x daily for 5 days after burn or sham burn). Cardiac function and inflammation were studied 24 h after septic challenge. In the absence of SDD, burn alone, sepsis alone, or burn plus septic challenge promoted cardiac myocyte secretion of TNF-alpha (burn, 174+/-11; sepsis, 269+/-19; burn+sepsis, 453+/-14 pg/ml), IL-1beta (burn, 35+/-2; sepsis, 29+/-1; burn+sepsis, 48+/-7 pg/ml), and IL-6 (burn, 143+/-18; sepsis, 116+/-3; burn+sepsis, 248+/-12 pg/ml) compared with values measured in sham (TNF-alpha, 3+/-1; IL-1beta, 1+/-0.4; IL-6, 6+/-1.5 pg/ml) (P<0.05). Impaired ventricular contraction and relaxation responses were evident in the absence of SDD [burn+sepsis: left ventricular pressure (LVP), 65+/-4 mmHg; rate of LVP rise (+dP/dt), 1,320+/-131 mmHg/s compared with values measured in sham: LVP, 96+/-4 mmHg; +dP/dt, 2,095+/-99 mmHg/s, P<0.05]. SDD treatment of experimental burn attenuated septic challenge-related inflammatory responses and improved myocardial contractile responses, producing cardiac TNF-alpha, IL-1beta, and IL-6 levels, LVP, +dP/dt, and rate of LVP fall (-dP/dt) values that were significantly better (P<0.05) than values measured in burn plus sepsis in the absence of SDD. This work confirms that endogenous gut organisms contribute to sensitivity to subsequent infectious challenge.

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract reduces bacterial bloodstream infection and mortality in critically ill patients. Systematic review of randomized, controlled trials

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) was undertaken to evaluate the impact of this procedure on bacterial bloodstream infection and mortality. Data sources were Medline, Embase, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, previous meta-analyses, and conference proceedings, without restriction of language or publication status. RCTs were retrieved that compared oropharyngeal and/or intestinal administration of antibiotics as part of the SDD protocol, with or without a parenteral component, with no treatment or placebo in the controls. The three outcome measures were patients with bloodstream infection, causative micro-organisms, and total mortality. Fifty-one RCTs conducted between 1987 and 2005, comprising 8065 critically ill patients were included in the review; 4079 patients received SDD and 3986 were controls. SDD significantly reduced overall bloodstream infections [odds ratio (OR), 0.73; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.59-0.90; P=0.0036], gram-negative bloodstream infections (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.24-0.63; P<0.001) and overall mortality (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69-0.94; P=0.0064), without affecting gram-positive bloodstream infections (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.77-1.47). The subgroup analysis showed an even larger impact of SDD using parenteral and enteral antimicrobials on overall bloodstream infections, bloodstream infections due to gram-negative bacteria and overall mortality with ORs of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.46-0.87; P=0.005), 0.30 (95% CI, 0.16-0.56; P<0.001), and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.61-0.91; P=0.0034), respectively. Twenty patients need to be treated with SDD to prevent one gram-negative bloodstream infection and 22 patients to prevent one death.

Impact of selective decontamination of the digestive tract on fungal carriage and infection: systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine the impact of the antifungal component of selective decontamination of the digestive tract on fungal carriage, infection and fungaemia.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of selective decontamination of the digestive tract.

STUDY SELECTION

Data sources included Medline, Embase, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, previous meta-analyses, personal communications and conference proceedings, without restriction of language or publication status. All randomized trials were selected that compared oropharyngeal and/or intestinal administration of antifungals amphotericin B or nystatin, as part of selective decontamination protocol, with no treatment in the controls. There were 42 randomized controlled trials with a total of 6,075 critically ill patients.

METHODS

Three reviewers independently applied selection criteria, performed quality assessment and extracted the data. The main outcome measures were patients with fungal carriage, patients with fungal infections and patients with fungaemia. Odds ratios were pooled with the random effect model.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Enteral antifungals significantly reduced fungal carriage (odds ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.19-0.53) and overall fungal infections (0.30, 0.17-0.53). Fungaemia was not significantly reduced in the treatment group (0.89, 0.16-4.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Antifungals, as part of selective decontamination of the digestive tract, reduce fungal carriage and infection but not fungaemia in critically ill patients and may justify the inclusion of an antifungal component in the decontamination protocol.

The role of selective digestive decontamination for reducing infection in patients undergoing liver transplantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Selective digestive decontamination (SDD) refers to the use of antimicrobials to reduce the burden of aerobic gram-negative bacteria and/or yeast in the intestinal tract to prevent infections caused by these organisms. Liver transplant patients are highly vulnerable to bacterial infection particularly with gram-negative organisms within the first month after transplantation, and SDD has been proposed as a potential measure to prevent these infections. However, the benefit of this procedure remains controversial. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine whether SDD is beneficial in reducing infections overall and those caused by gram-negative bacteria in patients following liver transplantation. All studies that evaluated the efficacy of SDD in liver transplant patients were included. Randomized trials that included liver transplant patients given SDD versus either placebo or no treatment or minimal treatment (e.g., oral nystatin alone), and that provided adequate data to calculate a relative risk ratio, were included in the meta-analysis. Our review shows that most studies found SDD to be effective in reducing gram-negative infection. The nonrandomized and uncontrolled trials also showed benefit with SDD in reducing overall infection; however, the effect on overall infection was limited in the 4 randomized trials, in which the pooled relative risk was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.7-1.1), indicating no statistically significant reduction in infection with the use of SDD. The summary risk ratio for the association between SDD and gram-negative infection was 0.16 (95% CI, 0.07-0.37), indicating an 84% relative risk reduction in the incidence of infection caused by gram-negative bacteria in patients receiving SDD in randomized trials. In conclusion, the available literature supports a beneficial effect of SDD on gram-negative infection following liver transplantation; however, the risk of antimicrobial resistance must be considered. Larger multicenter randomized trials in this patient population to assess the effect of SDD in reducing infection and mortality, while assessing the risk of antimicrobial resistance, are needed.

Long-term (6-year) effect of selective digestive decontamination on antimicrobial resistance in intensive care, multiple-trauma patients

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether selective digestive decontamination (SDD) had some negative impact on the bacterial resistance observed in strains isolated from samples from patients receiving nonabsorbable antibiotics and cefazolin.

DESIGN

Case-control study.

SETTING

Intensive care unit of a university tertiary-care hospital.

PATIENTS

Over a 6-yr period, 360 multiple trauma patients (case patients) submitted to SDD were compared with 360 patients not receiving SDD (controls).

INTERVENTIONS

SDD consisted of polymyxin E, gentamicin, and amphotericin B and was applied on the buccal mucosa and provided in the nares and the stomach. For the first 3 days, systemic cefazolin (1 g three times a day) was provided. Resistance analysis was performed in case patients and controls on samples collected at predetermined intervals.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

SDD was used in a small subset of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (360 of 5987 over the 6-yr study period). A relative overgrowth of gram-positive cocci was observed. Methicillin resistance of Staphylococcus epidermidis was increased (SDD 76%, controls 63%, p <.05) but not that of Staphylococcus aureus (SDD 20%, controls 18%). Resistance of Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter to beta-lactamines and aminoglycosides was the same in SDD patients and controls.

CONCLUSIONS

When used in a small subset of patients who have been shown to derive benefit from it (patients who have experienced multiple trauma), SDD has a moderate impact on microbial ecology. However, surveillance cultures are indispensable because the absence of resistance to SDD antibiotics determines the long-term safety of the SDD prophylaxis.

All great truths are iconoclastic: selective decontamination of the digestive tract moves from heresy to level 1 truth

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to compare evidence of the effectiveness, costs and safety of the traditional parenteral antibiotic-only approach against that gathered from 53 randomised trials involving more than 8,500 patients and six meta-analyses on selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) to control infection on the intensive care unit (ICU). PHILOSOPHY: Traditionalists believe that all infections are due to breaches of hygiene except those established in the first 2 days, and that all micro-organisms can cause death. In contrast, newer insights show that transmission via the hands of carers are responsible only for infections occurring after one week, and that only a limited range of 15 potential pathogens contribute to mortality. INTERVENTIONS TO PREVENT ICU INFECTION: The traditional approach is based on hand disinfection aiming at the prevention of transmission of all micro-organisms, to control all infections that occur after 2 days on the ICU. The second feature is the restrictive use of systemic antibiotics, only in cases of microbiologically proven infection. In contrast, SDD aims to control the three types of infection: primary, secondary endogenous and exogenous due to 15 potential pathogens. The classical SDD tetralogy comprises four components: (i) a parenteral antibiotic, cefotaxime, administered for three days to prevent primary endogenous infections typically occurring "early"; (ii) the oropharyngeal and enteral antimicrobials, polymyxin E, tobramycin and amphotericin B administered in throat and gut throughout the treatment on the ICU to prevent secondary endogenous infections tending to develop "late"; (iii) a high standard of hygiene to control transmission of potential pathogens; and (iv) surveillance samples of throat and rectum to monitor the efficacy of the treatment.

ENDPOINTS

(i) Infectious morbidity; (ii) mortality; (iii) antimicrobial resistance; and (iv) costs.

RESULTS

Properly designed trials on hand disinfection have never demonstrated a reduction in either pneumonia and septicaemia, or mortality. Two randomised trials using restrictive antibiotic policies failed to show a survival benefit at 28 days. In both trials the proportion of resistant isolates obtained from the lower ways was >60% despite significantly less use of antibiotics in the test group. A formal cost effectiveness analysis of the traditional antibiotic policies has not been performed. On the other hand, two meta-analyses have shown that SDD reduces the odds ratio for lower airway infections to 0.35 (0.29-0.41) and mortality to 0.80 (0.69-0.93), with a 6% overall mortality reduction from 30% to 24%. No increase in the rate of super infections due to resistant bacteria could be demonstrated over a period of 20 years of clinical research. Four randomised trials found the cost per survivor to be substantially lower in patients receiving SDD than for those traditionally managed.

CONCLUSIONS

The traditionalists still rely on level 5 evidence, i.e. expert opinion, with a grade E recommendation, whilst the proponents of SDD are able to cite level 1 evidence allowing a grade A recommendation in their attempts to control infection on the ICU. The main reason for SDD not being widely used is the primacy of opinion over evidence.

Acute stroke predisposes to oral gram-negative bacilli -- a cause of aspiration pneumonia?

OBJECTIVES

To assess any change in the oral flora in the mouths of stroke patients during the acute and rehabilitation phases and to determine whether this is related to episodes of aspiration pneumonia and clinical outcome.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This observational study was carried out in hospital wards in a University teaching hospital. The subjects were patients immediately post-stroke and during the rehabilitation period, acute admissions and a group of healthy volunteers. An assessment of dentition and swallow in the presence or absence of oral aerobic gram-negative bacilli (AGNB) was correlated.

RESULTS

Of the acute stroke patients 52% had an unsafe swallow. AGNB carriage was documented in 34% of the acute stroke group. Of the 11 patients who died 55% had AGNB, 73% had an unsafe swallow and 36% had a combination of both.

CONCLUSION

AGNB is a common finding in acute stroke patients. It is not a consequence of age or acute hospitalisation and is associated with an unsafe swallow and a higher mortality.

Enteral vancomycin to control methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus outbreak in mechanically ventilated patients

BACKGROUND

Screening for and treating gut carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) may control transmission and subsequent endemicity of MRSA.

OBJECTIVE

Enteral vancomycin was evaluated as a measure to control an outbreak of MRSA infection in the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

During the 8-month study of sequential design, 176 patients were admitted, 65 (37%) of whom required a minimum of 3 days of ventilation. Forty-four patients were studied in the first 5 months, during which traditional measures were reinforced (control group). During the following 3 months, 13 of 21 patients developed MRSA carriage and received 2 g/day of enteral vancomycin, with high standards of hygiene maintained (treatment group).

RESULTS

Thirty-three MRSA infections occurred in 22 patients (50%) in the control group, whereas 2 patients (9.5%) had 2 MRSA infections in the treatment group (P <.05 for carriage, infection rates, and episodes). Of the 33 MRSA infections in the control group, 27 were due to MRSA acquired in the ICU, whereas the 2 infections in the treatment group were primary endogenous (ie, caused by MRSA present in the patient's admission flora). The probability of developing an MRSA infection was reduced in patients receiving enteral vancomycin compared with patients in the control group (odds ratio, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.24-0.58). Enteral vancomycin significantly reduced the level of MRSA carriage; the mean carriage index was 1.01 in the control group versus 0.58 in the test group (P <.05). Neither vancomycin-resistant enterococci nor vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus were isolated from either surveillance or diagnostic samples.

CONCLUSIONS

The eradication of MRSA gut carriage by enteral vancomycin in a small subset of ICU patients was effective in the control of an MRSA outbreak.

Influence on outcome of ventilator-associated pneumonia in multiple trauma patients with head trauma treated with selected digestive decontamination

OBJECTIVE

Ventilator-associated pneumonia is said to be associated with an increased mortality or a prolonged intensive care unit stay. In multiple trauma, the use of selective digestive decontamination has been reported to decrease morbidity and mortality associated with pneumonia. We performed a study to evaluate the attributable morbidity and mortality of ventilator-associated pneumonia in multiple trauma patients with head trauma treated with selective digestive decontamination.

DESIGN

Prospective, matched-paired, case-control study.

SETTING

Intensive care unit at a tertiary university hospital.

PATIENTS

During a 6-yr period, 324 consecutive multiple trauma patients with head trauma requiring mechanical ventilation for >48 hrs were prospectively followed for the development of VAP. Case-control matching criteria were as follows: 1) age difference within 5 yrs, 2) Glasgow coma scale within five categories, 3) injury severity score within 5 points, 4) APACHE II score within 5 points, 5) ventilation of control patients for at least as long as the cases. The selective digestive decontamination regimen was used in all patients (cases and controls): polymixin E, gentamicin, and amphotericin B. Systemic cefazolin (1 g three times a day) was given for the first 3 days of intensive care unit stay.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Analysis was performed on 58 pairs that were matched with 100% of success The most common isolates recovered were Staphylococcus aureus (39%) and Haemophilus influenzae (22%). High-risk pathogens were rarely isolated: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (5.1%), Acinetobacter species (8.6%), and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (6.7%). The duration of mechanical ventilation and intensive care unit stay were increased in case patients (11.6 +/- 1.7 and 22.7 +/- 2.9 days, respectively) compared with control patients (9.4 +/- 1.3 and 16.8 +/- 2.9 days, respectively; p <.0006). Mortality was similar in both case (17%) and control (24%) patients.

CONCLUSION

Ventilator-associated pneumonia did not seem to increase mortality of multiple trauma patients with head trauma who received selective digestive decontamination. Whether or not this conclusion applied to trauma patients not receiving selective digestive decontamination should be evaluated in further studies.

Selective decontamination of the digestive tract

Ventilator-associated pneumonia usually originates from the patient's oropharyngeal microflora. In selective digestive decontamination, topical antibiotics are applied to the oropharynx and stomach for prevention of pneumonia and other infections, possibly reducing infection-related mortality. Selective digestive decontamination is also used for the prevention of gut-derived infections in acute necrotizing pancreatitis and liver transplantation. Despite numerous clinical trials, selective digestive decontamination remains controversial. Reduction of the incidence of pneumonia is accepted, but the extent of reduction is debated. Mortality was not reduced in most individual trials, but this finding was calculated in meta-analyses, especially for combined use of topical and systemic antibiotics in surgical ICU patients. Some investigators reported increased resistance and a shift to Gram-positive pathogens. Today, it appears that selective means not only selective suppression of pathogenic bacteria but also selection of appropriate groups of patients for underlying diseases and severity of illness, and selection of ICUs, where the endemic resistance patterns might allow the use of selective digestive decontamination at a relatively low risk for increased selection pressure.

Infection control in the ICU

Nosocomial infections (NIs) now concern 5 to 15% of hospitalized patients and can lead to complications in 25 to 33% of those patients admitted to ICUs. The most common causes are pneumonia related to mechanical ventilation, intra-abdominal infections following trauma or surgery, and bacteremia derived from intravascular devices. This overview is targeted at ICU physicians to convince them that the principles of infection control in the ICU are based on simple concepts and that the application of preventive strategies should not be viewed as an administrative or constraining control of their activity but, rather, as basic measures that are easy to implement at the bedside. A detailed knowledge of the epidemiology, based on adequate surveillance methodologies, is necessary to understand the pathophysiology and the rationale of preventive strategies that have been demonstrated to be effective. The principles of general preventive measures such as the implementation of standard and isolation precautions, and the control of antibiotic use are reviewed. Specific practical measures, targeted at the practical prevention and control of ventilator-associated pneumonia, sinusitis, and bloodstream, urinary tract, and surgical site infections are detailed. Recent data strongly confirm that these strategies may only be effective over prolonged periods if they can be integrated into the behavior of all staff members who are involved in patient care. Accordingly, infection control measures are to be viewed as a priority and have to be integrated fully into the continuous process of improvement of the quality of care.

Pneumonia in patients with severe burns : a classification according to the concept of the carrier state

OBJECTIVE

To establish baseline values of pneumonia incidence and mortality and to distinguish primary endogenous from secondary endogenous and exogenous pneumonias in a homogeneous patient population with severe burns.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

A six-bed burn ICU.

PATIENTS

All patients of > or = 14 years admitted to the ICU between January 1995 and June 1996 with a total body surface area burn of > or = 20%.

INTERVENTION

Collection of data on surveillance samples from throat and rectum on admission and twice weekly afterward, and pneumonias during the ICU stay.

MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Fifty-six patients fulfilled the criteria of the study. Mean age was 43 +/- 19.8 years; total body surface area burn, 41 +/- 18.2%; the area of full-thickness burn was 24 +/- 17.7%. Forty-one patients required mechanical ventilation. Twenty-seven patients (48%) experienced 37 episodes of pneumonia. Twenty-one pneumonias were of primary endogenous development, ie, caused by potential pathogens carried in the admission flora. There were 14 secondary endogenous and 2 exogenous infections caused by microorganisms acquired on the burn unit. Inhalation injury was identified in 26 patients. The pneumonia rate was two times higher in the subset of patients with inhalation injury compared with the group of patients without inhalation injury (p < 0.001). Overall mortality was 25%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that pneumonia in burn patients is mainly an endogenous problem. Interventions that prevent the development of endogenous infections deserve prospective evaluation in patients with severe burns.