Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The Clinical Utility of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Nasal Screening to Rule Out MRSA Pneumonia: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis With Antimicrobial Stewardship Implications.
Parente, Diane M; Cunha, Cheston B; Mylonakis, Eleftherios; Timbrook, Tristan T.
Afiliação
  • Parente DM; Department of Pharmacy, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Cunha CB; Infectious Disease Division, Rhode Island Hospital and The Miriam Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Mylonakis E; Division of Infectious Diseases, Brown University, Warren Alpert Medical School, Providence, Rhode Island.
  • Timbrook TT; Infectious Disease Division, Rhode Island Hospital and The Miriam Hospital, Providence, Rhode Island.
Clin Infect Dis ; 67(1): 1-7, 2018 06 18.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29340593
ABSTRACT

Background:

Recent literature has highlighted methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screening as a possible antimicrobial stewardship program tool for avoiding unnecessary empiric MRSA therapy for pneumonia, yet current guidelines recommend MRSA therapy based on risk factors. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic value of MRSA nasal screening in MRSA pneumonia.

Methods:

PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception to November 2016 for English studies evaluating MRSA nasal screening and development of MRSA pneumonia. Data analysis was performed using a bivariate random-effects model to estimate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).

Results:

Twenty-two studies, comprising 5163 patients, met our inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MRSA nares screen for all MRSA pneumonia types were 70.9% and 90.3%, respectively. With a 10% prevalence of potential MRSA pneumonia, the calculated PPV was 44.8%, and the NPV was 96.5%. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for MRSA community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) were 85% and 92.1%, respectively. For CAP and HCAP both the PPV and NPV increased, to 56.8% and 98.1%, respectively. In comparison, for MRSA ventilated-associated pneumonia, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 40.3%, 93.7%, 35.7%, and 94.8%, respectively.

Conclusion:

Nares screening for MRSA had a high specificity and NPV for ruling out MRSA pneumonia, particularly in cases of CAP/HCAP. Based on the NPV, MRSA nares screening is a valuable tool for AMS to streamline empiric antibiotic therapy, especially among patients with pneumonia who are not colonized with MRSA.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pneumonia Estafilocócica / Programas de Rastreamento / Nariz / Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Pneumonia Estafilocócica / Programas de Rastreamento / Nariz / Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies / Screening_studies / Systematic_reviews Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2018 Tipo de documento: Article