The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Follow-up Protected Specimen Brushes to Assess Treatment in Nosocomial Pneumonia
Abstract
To prospectively determine the bacteriologic and clinical efficacy of antimicrobial therapy for nosocomial bacterial pneumonia selected based upon information provided by cultures of protected specimen brush (PSB) samples obtained during bronchoscopy, 76 consecutive patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia were studied using follow-up quantitative PSB cultures obtained after 3 days of treatment. Of the 173 microorganisms initially present in the PSB samples, only 11 (6%) were not eradicated by antimicrobial therapy, including three recovered at high (> or = 10(3) cfu/ml) concentrations. Thirty-two emerging pathogens, including nine at high concentrations, were also detected; 26 of them (81%) were resistant to the initial antibiotics administered. Of the 76 patients included in the study, cultures of follow-up PSB samples identified 51 in whom the infection site in the lung was completely sterilized, 16 with low-grade infection, and only nine with persistent high-grade infection. Analysis of clinical outcome within the 15 days after the initiation of antimicrobial therapy demonstrated clinical improvement in 62 of 67 (93%) patients in whom the site of infection was contained by treatment as compared with four of 9 (44%) patients with persistent high-grade infection (p < 0.01). These data suggest that appropriate antimicrobial therapy for ventilator-associated pneumonia results in the control of the initial infection in 88% of the patients. However, an early superinfection caused by multiresistant pathogens can occur in a small subset of these patients. When follow-up PSB cultures were negative, an improved outcome was noted.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Impact of BAL Data on the Therapy and Outcome of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia
Luna, C. M., Vujacich, P., Niederman, M. S., Vay, C., Gherardi, C., Matera, J., & Jolly, E. C. (1997) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.111.3.676 · Cited by 916
The Influence of Mini-BAL Cultures on Patient Outcomes
MD, M. H. K., & Ward, S. (1998) · Chest · doi:10.1378/chest.113.2.412 · Cited by 494
Luna, C. M., Blanzaco, D., Niederman, M. S., Matarucco, W., Baredes, N. C., Desmery, P., Palizas, F., Menga, G., Rios, F., & Apezteguia, C. (2003) · Critical Care Medicine · doi:10.1097/01.ccm.0000055380.86458.1e · Cited by 477
Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia
(2012) · SpringerReference · doi:10.1007/springerreference_225126 · Cited by 406
Does This Patient Have Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia?
Klompas, M. (2007) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.297.14.1583 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Montravers, P., Fagon, J.-Y., Chastre, J., Lecso, M., Dombret, M. C., Trouillet, J.-L., & Gibert, C.
- Venue
- American Review of Respiratory Disease
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1993-01
- Volume
- 147
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 38-44
- ISSN
- 0003-0805 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2006492651
- Cited by
- 241
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 10.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Follow-up Protected Specimen Brushes to Assess Treatment in Nosocomial Pneumonia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1164/ajrccm/147.1.38
- The paper
- Montravers, P., Fagon, J.-Y., Chastre, J., Lecso, M., Dombret, M. C., Trouillet, J.-L., & Gibert, C. (1993). Follow-up Protected Specimen Brushes to Assess Treatment in Nosocomial Pneumonia. American Review of Respiratory Disease. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/147.1.38
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.