A Survey of the European Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EABIP)

Publisher Copyright: © Copyright 2017 S. Karger AG, Basel. All rights reserved.Background: Airway stenting (AS) commenced in Europe circa 1987 with the first placement of a dedicated silicone airway stent. Subsequently, over the last 3 decades, AS was spread throughout Europe, using different insertion techniques and different types of stents. Objectives: This study is an international survey conducted by the European Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology (EABIP) focusing on AS practice within 26 European countries. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to all EABIP National Delegates in February 2015. National delegates were responsible for obtaining precise and objective data regarding the current AS practice in their country. The deadline for data collection was February 2016. Results: France, Germany, and the UK are the 3 leading countries in terms of number of centres performing AS. These 3 nations represent the highest ranked nations within Europe in terms of gross national income. Overall, pulmonologists perform AS exclusively in 5 countries and predominately in 12. AS is performed almost exclusively in public hospitals. AS performed under general anaesthesia is the rule for the majority of institutions, and local anaesthesia is an alternative in 9 countries. Rigid bronchoscopy techniques are predominant in 20 countries. Amongst commercially available stents, both Dumon and Ultraflex are by far the most commonly deployed. Finally, 11 countries reported that AS is an economically viable activity, while 10 claimed that it is not. Conclusion: This EABIP survey demonstrates that there is significant heterogeneity in AS practice within Europe. Therapeutic bronchoscopy training and economic issues/reimbursement for procedures are likely to be the primary reasons explaining these findings.publishersversionpublishe

Microbiological testing of adults hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia: An international study

This study aimed to describe real-life microbiological testing of adults hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and to assess concordance with the 2007 Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)/American Thoracic Society (ATS) and 2011 European Respiratory Society (ERS) CAP guidelines. This was a cohort study based on the Global Initiative for Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus Pneumonia (GLIMP) database, which contains point-prevalence data on adults hospitalised with CAP across 54 countries during 2015. In total, 3702 patients were included. Testing was performed in 3217 patients, and included blood culture (71.1%), sputum culture (61.8%), Legionella urinary antigen test (30.1%), pneumococcal urinary antigen test (30.0%), viral testing (14.9%), acute-phase serology (8.8%), bronchoalveolar lavage culture (8.4%) and pleural fluid culture (3.2%). A pathogen was detected in 1173 (36.5%) patients. Testing attitudes varied significantly according to geography and disease severity. Testing was concordant with IDSA/ATS and ERS guidelines in 16.7% and 23.9% of patients, respectively. IDSA/ATS concordance was higher in Europe than in North America (21.5% versus 9.8%; p<0.01), while ERS concordance was higher in North America than in Europe (33.5% versus 19.5%; p<0.01). Testing practices of adults hospitalised with CAP varied significantly by geography and disease severity. There was a wide discordance between real-life testing practices and IDSA/ATS/ERS guideline recommendations

Atypical pathogens in hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia: A worldwide perspective

Background: Empirical antibiotic coverage for atypical pathogens in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) has long been debated, mainly because of a lack of epidemiological data. We aimed to assess both testing for atypical pathogens and their prevalence in hospitalized patients with CAP worldwide, especially in relation with disease severity. Methods: A secondary analysis of the GLIMP database, an international, multicentre, point-prevalence study of adult patients admitted for CAP in 222 hospitals across 6 continents in 2015, was performed. The study evaluated frequency of testing for atypical pathogens, including L. pneumophila, M. pneumoniae, C. pneumoniae, and their prevalence. Risk factors for testing and prevalence for atypical pathogens were assessed through univariate analysis. Results: Among 3702 CAP patients 1250 (33.8%) underwent at least one test for atypical pathogens. Testing varies greatly among countries and its frequency was higher in Europe than elsewhere (46.0% vs. 12.7%, respectively, p < 0.0001). Detection of L. pneumophila urinary antigen was the most common test performed worldwide (32.0%). Patients with severe CAP were less likely to be tested for both atypical pathogens considered together (30.5% vs. 35.0%, p = 0.009) and specifically for legionellosis (28.3% vs. 33.5%, p = 0.003) than the rest of the population. Similarly, L. pneumophila testing was lower in ICU patients. At least one atypical pathogen was isolated in 62 patients (4.7%), including M. pneumoniae (26/251 patients, 10.3%), L. pneumophila (30/1186 patients, 2.5%), and C. pneumoniae (8/228 patients, 3.5%). Patients with CAP due to atypical pathogens were significantly younger, showed less cardiovascular, renal, and metabolic comorbidities in comparison to adult patients hospitalized due to non-atypical pathogen CAP. Conclusions: Testing for atypical pathogens in patients admitted for CAP in poorly standardized in real life and does not mirror atypical prevalence in different settings. Further evidence on the impact of atypical pathogens, expecially in the low-income countries, is needed to guidelines implementation

Prevalence and etiology of community-acquired pneumonia in immunocompromised patients

Background. The correct management of immunocompromised patients with pneumonia is debated. We evaluated the prevalence, risk factors, and characteristics of immunocompromised patients coming from the community with pneumonia. Methods. We conducted a secondary analysis of an international, multicenter study enrolling adult patients coming from the community with pneumonia and hospitalized in 222 hospitals in 54 countries worldwide. Risk factors for immunocompromise included AIDS, aplastic anemia, asplenia, hematological cancer, chemotherapy, neutropenia, biological drug use, lung transplantation, chronic steroid use, and solid tumor. Results. At least 1 risk factor for immunocompromise was recorded in 18% of the 3702 patients enrolled. The prevalences of risk factors significantly differed across continents and countries, with chronic steroid use (45%), hematological cancer (25%), and chemotherapy (22%) the most common. Among immunocompromised patients, community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) pathogens were the most frequently identified, and prevalences did not differ from those in immunocompetent patients. Risk factors for immunocompromise were independently associated with neither Pseudomonas aeruginosa nor non\u2013community-acquired bacteria. Specific risk factors were independently associated with fungal infections (odds ratio for AIDS and hematological cancer, 15.10 and 4.65, respectively; both P = .001), mycobacterial infections (AIDS; P = .006), and viral infections other than influenza (hematological cancer, 5.49; P < .001). Conclusions. Our findings could be considered by clinicians in prescribing empiric antibiotic therapy for CAP in immunocompromised patients. Patients with AIDS and hematological cancer admitted with CAP may have higher prevalences of fungi, mycobacteria, and noninfluenza viruses

Burden and risk factors for Pseudomonas aeruginosa community-acquired pneumonia:a Multinational Point Prevalence Study of Hospitalised Patients

Pseudornonas aeruginosa is a challenging bacterium to treat due to its intrinsic resistance to the antibiotics used most frequently in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Data about the global burden and risk factors associated with P. aeruginosa-CAP are limited. We assessed the multinational burden and specific risk factors associated with P. aeruginosa-CAP. We enrolled 3193 patients in 54 countries with confirmed diagnosis of CAP who underwent microbiological testing at admission. Prevalence was calculated according to the identification of P. aeruginosa. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for antibiotic-susceptible and antibiotic-resistant P. aeruginosa-CAP. The prevalence of P. aeruginosa and antibiotic-resistant P. aeruginosa-CAP was 4.2% and 2.0%, respectively. The rate of P. aeruginosa CAP in patients with prior infection/colonisation due to P. aeruginosa and at least one of the three independently associated chronic lung diseases (i.e. tracheostomy, bronchiectasis and/or very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) was 67%. In contrast, the rate of P. aeruginosa-CAP was 2% in patients without prior P. aeruginosa infection/colonisation and none of the selected chronic lung diseases. The multinational prevalence of P. aeruginosa-CAP is low. The risk factors identified in this study may guide healthcare professionals in deciding empirical antibiotic coverage for CAP patients

Association between titration method and outcomes of first night satisfaction and CPAP compliance

Introduction: The gold standard therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Our study evaluated the relationship between first night satisfaction and CPAP compliance, and the effect of using the titration method in this relationship. Methods: Between January 2012 and December 2012, 40 patients with the diagnosis of OSAS and without comorbidities, who had undergone CPAP titration, were included. Of these, 20 patients had undergone manual titration (MT) with polysomnography, whereas 20 patients had undergone auto-adjusted CPAP (APAP) titration. Questionnaires were administered during the morning of the titration night. The first-year adherence to treatment and patient compliance were evaluated. Results: Forty patients were randomised in two groups; 35 patients who could procure the CPAP and were available at the end of the first year completed the study. From the 35 patients, 20 (6 males; 40%) were in the MT group while 15 (6 males; 30%) were in the APAP group. No significant difference was detected between the mean titration pressure levels obtained with the MT or APAP group. There was no difference in terms of responses to the questions on the questionnaire between the two groups. At the first-year evaluation, no significant difference was detected between the groups. Conclusions: The titration method used to detect CPAP pressure, MT, or APAP does not affect patient satisfaction on the day following the titration night, and does not affect first-year compliance. © 2018 by Turkish Association of Neuropsychiatry