International ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for the management of hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia

The most recent European guidelines and task force reports on hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) were published almost 10 years ago. Since then, further randomised clinical trials of HAP and VAP have been conducted and new information has become available. Studies of epidemiology, diagnosis, empiric treatment, response to treatment, new antibiotics or new forms of antibiotic administration and disease prevention have changed old paradigms. In addition, important differences between approaches in Europe and the USA have become apparent.The European Respiratory Society launched a project to develop new international guidelines for HAP and VAP. Other European societies, including the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, were invited to participate and appointed their representatives. The Latin American Thoracic Association was also invited.A total of 15 experts and two methodologists made up the panel. Three experts from the USA were also invited (Michael S. Niederman, Marin Kollef and Richard Wunderink).Applying the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology, the panel selected seven PICO (population-intervention-comparison-outcome) questions that generated a series of recommendations for HAP/VAP diagnosis, treatment and prevention.(AU)

Prevention of COPD exacerbations: a European Respiratory Society/American Thoracic Society guideline

This document provides clinical recommendations for the prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations. It represents a collaborative effort between the European Respiratory Society and the American Thoracic Society.Comprehensive evidence syntheses were performed to summarise all available evidence relevant to the Task Force's questions. The evidence was appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach and the results were summarised in evidence profiles. The evidence syntheses were discussed and recommendations formulated by a multidisciplinary Task Force of COPD experts.After considering the balance of desirable (benefits) and undesirable consequences (burden in the form of adverse effects and cost), quality of evidence, feasibility, and acceptability of various interventions, the Task Force made recommendations for mucolytic, long-acting muscarinic antagonist, phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor (roflumilast) and macrolide therapy, as well as a conditional recommendation against fluoroquinolone therapy. All of the recommendations were conditional, except for a strong recommendation for the use of a long-acting antimuscarinic agent versus a long-acting ß2-adrenergic, indicating that there was uncertainty about the balance of desirable and undesirable consequences of the intervention, and that well-informed patients may make different choices regarding whether to have or not have the specific intervention.The guideline summarises the evidence and provides recommendations for pharmacological therapy for the prevention of COPD exacerbations

Guía española de la enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (GesEPOC) 2017: tratamiento farmacológico en fase estable / Spanish guidelines for management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (GesEPOC) 2017: pharmacological treatment of stable phase

La enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica (EPOC) presenta una gran heterogeneidad clínica, por lo que su tratamiento se debe individualizar según el nivel de riesgo y el fenotipo. La Guía española de la EPOC (GesEPOC) estableció por primera vez en 2012 unas pautas de tratamiento farmacológico basadas en fenotipos clínicos. Estas pautas han sido adoptadas posteriormente por otras normativas nacionales, y han sido respaldadas por nuevas evidencias publicadas desde entonces. En esta actualización 2017 se ha sustituido la clasificación de gravedad inicial por una clasificación de riesgo mucho más sencilla (bajo o alto riesgo), basándose en la función pulmonar, el grado de disnea y la historia de agudizaciones, y se recomienda la determinación del fenotipo clínico únicamente en pacientes de alto riesgo. Se mantienen los mismos fenotipos clínicos: no agudizador, EPOC-asma (ACO), agudizador con enfisema y agudizador con bronquitis crónica. La base del tratamiento farmacológico de la EPOC es la broncodilatación, y también es el único tratamiento recomendado en pacientes de bajo riesgo. En los pacientes con alto riesgo se añadirán diversos fármacos a los broncodilatadores según el fenotipo clínico. GesEPOC supone una aproximación al tratamiento de la EPOC más individualizado según las características clínicas de los pacientes y su nivel de riesgo o de complejidad.(AU)

The clinical presentation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) varies widely, so treatment must be tailored according to the level of risk and phenotype. In 2012, the Spanish COPD Guidelines (GesEPOC) first established pharmacological treatment regimens based on clinical phenotypes. These regimens were subsequently adopted by other national guidelines, and since then, have been backed up by new evidence. In this 2017 update, the original severity classification has been replaced by a much simpler risk classification (low or high risk), on the basis of lung function, dyspnea grade, and history of exacerbations, while determination of clinical phenotype is recommended only in high-risk patients. The same clinical phenotypes have been maintained: non-exacerbator, asthma-COPD overlap (ACO), exacerbator with emphysema, and exacerbator with bronchitis. Pharmacological treatment of COPD is based on bronchodilators, the only treatment recommended in low-risk patients. High-risk patients will receive different drugs in addition to bronchodilators, depending on their clinical phenotype. GesEPOC reflects a more individualized approach to COPD treatment, according to patient clinical characteristics and level of risk or complexity.(AU)

European Respiratory Society guidelines for the diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia

The diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia is often confirmed with standard, albeit complex and expensive, tests. In many cases, however, the diagnosis remains difficult despite the array of sophisticated diagnostic tests. There is no "gold standard" reference test. Hence, a Task Force supported by the European Respiratory Society has developed this guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations on diagnostic testing, especially in light of new developments in such tests, and the need for robust diagnoses of patients who might enter randomised controlled trials of treatments. The guideline is based on pre-defined questions relevant for clinical care, a systematic review of the literature, and assessment of the evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. It focuses on clinical presentation, nasal nitric oxide, analysis of ciliary beat frequency and pattern by high-speed video-microscopy analysis, transmission electron microscopy, genotyping and immunofluorescence. It then used a modified Delphi survey to develop an algorithm for the use of diagnostic tests to definitively confirm and exclude the diagnosis of primary ciliary dyskinesia; and to provide advice when the diagnosis was not conclusive. Finally, this guideline proposes a set of quality criteria for future research on the validity of diagnostic methods for primary ciliary dyskinesia

Efficiency of pragmatic search strategies to update clinical guidelines recommendations.

BACKGROUND: A major challenge in updating clinical guidelines is to efficiently identify new, relevant evidence. We evaluated the efficiency and feasibility of two new approaches: the development of restrictive search strategies using PubMed Clinical Queries for MEDLINE and the use of the PLUS (McMaster Premium Literature Service) database. METHODS: We evaluated a random sample of recommendations from a national guideline development program and identified the references that would potentially trigger an update (key references) using an exhaustive approach. We designed restrictive search strategies using the minimum number of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and text words required from the original exhaustive search strategies and applying broad and narrow filters. We developed PLUS search strategies, matching Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine (SNOMED) terms with guideline topics. We compared the number of key references retrieved by these approaches with those retrieved by the exhaustive approach. RESULTS: The restrictive approach retrieved 68.1 % fewer references than the exhaustive approach (12,486 versus 39,136), and identified 89.9 % (62/69) of key references and 88 % (22/25) of recommendation updates. The use of PLUS retrieved 88.5 % fewer references than the exhaustive approach (4,486 versus 39,136) and identified substantially fewer key references (18/69, 26.1 %) and fewer recommendation updates (10/25, 40 %). CONCLUSIONS: The proposed restrictive approach is a highly efficient and feasible method to identify new evidence that triggers a recommendation update. Searching only in the PLUS database proved to be a suboptimal approach and suggests the need for topic-specific tailoring.

Quality of tuberculosis guidelines: urgent need for improvement.

SETTING: Clinical practice guidelines have been developed for many disorders, but their quality varies greatly and does not always reach an acceptable standard. No evaluation of clinical practice guidelines on tuberculosis (TB) has been carried out to date. OBJECTIVE: To identify and assess the quality of TB guidelines. DESIGN: We systematically searched documents published from January 1998 to May 2008 in Medline and the Turning Research into Practice (TRIP) database and in clearing houses and on websites of scientific societies. Three appraisers evaluated each guideline using the AGREE (Appraisal of Guidelines, Research and Evaluation) instrument. A standardised score was calculated separately for each of the six domains. RESULTS: A total of 36 guidelines for TB were identified, and after appraisal good overall agreement was observed among the three evaluators. Results revealed that quality was acceptable in two domains but had serious shortcomings in the other four. A slight improvement in quality was observed in documents published in 2005 or later. After global assessment, 18 documents were considered 'recommended with provisos' and only two documents 'strongly recommended' for use in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: The methodological quality of TB guidelines was disappointingly low. All guideline developers should adhere to instruments such as AGREE to produce documents of optimal quality.

[Use of levofloxacin in the hospital]. / Utilización hospitalaria de levofloxacino.

Levofloxacin is a new, recently commercialized fluoroquinolone. We aimed to assess the use of levofloxacin after its inclusion in the hospital drug guide. In a prospective observational study, patients treated with levofloxacin in a university hospital were selected from July 2000 to June 2001. Using a structured questionnaire, data were recorded on patients' demographic characteristics and comorbidities, indications for levofloxacin use and previous use of other antibiotics. In addition, the adherence to the instructions for use as recommended by the antibiotic subcommittee of the hospital, and the use of other alternative antibiotics were analyzed. Ninety-seven patients were treated [mean age 67 years; range 17-93; 64 men], of whom 83 (85.6%) had comorbidity and 51 (52.6%) a possible allergy to the betalactam antibiotics. The treatment began after the use of other antibiotics in 47 (48.5%) patients. The main clinical indications were pneumonia (54; 55.7%) and acute exacerbation of chronic bronchitis (25; 25.8%). The use of other antibiotics was possible in 56 (57.7%) patients, and levofloxacin was only used according to the recommended indications in 41 (42.3%). Levofloxacin is mainly used in the treatment of patients with respiratory infections, those who are allergic to the betalactam antibiotics and those previously treated with other antibiotics; however, in many cases, the use of other antibiotics may still be possible. As part of the antibiotic policy, it is necessary to define the indications of use for new antibiotics introduced in the hospital and surveillance studies need to be developed.

Utilización hospitalaria de levofloxacino / Use of levofloxacin in the hospital

El objetivo del estudio fue evaluar el uso de levofloxacino después de su inclusión en la guía hospitalaria de medicamentos. Fue un estudio observacional prospectivo (julio 2000-junio 2001) en el cual se seleccionaron los pacientes tratados con levofloxacino en un hospital universitario. Mediante un cuestionario estructurado se recogieron datos sobre las características demográficas y comorbilidad de los pacientes, indicaciones de uso y uso previo de otros antibióticos. Además, se analizó la adecuación a las indicaciones de uso recomendadas por la subcomisión de antibióticos del hospital y el uso de otros antibióticos alternativos. Se trataron 97 pacientes (edad mediana 67 años, rango 17-93; 64 hombres), de los cuales 83 (85,6 por ciento) tenían comorbilidad y 51 (52,6 por ciento) una posible alergia a los betalactámicos. Se inició el tratamiento después del uso de otros antibióticos en 47 (48,5 por ciento) pacientes. Las principales indicaciones clínicas fueron neumonía (54; 55,7 por ciento) y sobreinfecciones respiratorias (25; 25,8 por ciento). En 56 (57,7 por ciento) pacientes era posible el uso de otros antibióticos alternativos y sólo en 41 (42,3 por ciento) se utilizó según las indicaciones recomendadas. Levofloxacino se utiliza sobre todo en el tratamiento de pacientes con infecciones respiratorias, alérgicos a los betalactámicos y tratados previamente con otros antibióticos, aunque en muchos casos todavía sea posible el uso de otros antibióticos. Dentro de la política de antibióticos es necesario definir las indicaciones para los nuevos antibióticos introducidos en el hospital y el desarrollo de estudios de seguimiento después de su inclusión (AU)