Use of serology and polymerase chain reaction to detect atypical respiratory pathogens during acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS: To use serological and multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays to examine sputum samples from patients experiencing acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) for the presence of atypical pathogens, including Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydia pneumoniae, and Legionella pneumophila. METHODS: From September 2012 to February 2014, 341 patients with AECOPD attending outpatient clinics were enrolled as part of a randomized, double-blind, multicenter study. A commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to measure serum immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG antibody titers on the first day of the study and at 36 days post-enrollment. Multiplex PCR was used to test sputum samples for the presence of atypical pathogens. A urinary antigen test for L. pneumophila was performed on the first day. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (5.6%) showed serological evidence of acute infection with M. pneumoniae. Also, one and seven patients (2%) showed serological evidence of acute infection with C. pneumoniae and L. pneumophila, respectively. All DNA samples were negative for M. pneumoniae, C. pneumoniae, and L. pneumophila according to PCR. Only one urine sample was positive for L. pneumophila antigen, but serologic evidence was lacking. CONCLUSIONS: Serological testing suggested that infection by atypical pathogens during AECOPD was relatively uncommon. In addition, PCR provided no direct evidence of infection by atypical pathogens. Thus, atypical pathogens may not be a major cause of AECOPD in South Korea.

Practice and Experience of Clinical Pharmacists Participating in the Treatment of 2 Cases of Atypical Pathogens Infection / 中国药师

Objective:To investigate the thoughts and methods of clinical pharmacists involving in the treatment of 2 cases of atyp-ical pathogen infection. Methods:The consultation cases of 2 patients with atypical pathogens infection were analyzed,and the consul-tation experience was summarized. Results: After the consultation, the treatment efficacy of the patients was obvious. Conclusion:Clinical pharmacists can assist doctors in improving the efficacy and safety of drug treatment.

Eficacia clínica de los macrólidos como parte del tratamiento empírico en neumonía de la comunidad que se interna: estudio piloto, aleatorizado, a doble-ciego / Clinical efficacy of macrolides as part of a combination therapy of community-acquired pneumonia: a pilot study

Introducción: A la fecha no se ha publicado un estudio aleatorizado que soporte las recomendaciones de tratamiento combinado en neumonía de la comunidad (NAC). El objetivo de este ensayo piloto fue evaluar los efectos clínicos de la adición de un macrólidoa la terapia empírica en pacientes con NAC. Materiales y métodos: Se aleatorizaron sesenta y dos pacientes hospitalizados por NAC a recibir ampicilina/sulbactam IV más azitromicina oral (n=32) versus ampicilina/sulbactam IV más placebo (n=30) a doble ciego. El punto final principal fue la cura precoz, evaluada al 5to día, definida como alta médica antes del 5to día ó estabilización clínica sin necesidad de cambios terapéuticos. Los puntos finales secundarios fueronestadía hospitalaria, fallo terapéutico y mortalidad. Resultados: La cura precoz fue mayor en el grupo macrólidos (81% vs 53%) (p=0.02), con una reducción de riesgo relativa de 60% (95% CI: 10-82%), una reducción absoluta de riesgo de 28% (95% CI: 5-50%) y un número necesario a tratar de 3 pacientes (95%CI: 2-18). La estadía hospitalaria fue menor en el grupo macrólidos (6,5 ± 2,3 vs 8,5 ±4,5 días, p=0.027). No hubo diferencias en cuanto a fallo terapéutico (3 versus 6 pacientes) ni mortalidad entre ambos grupos. Conclusiones: En este estudio piloto, el uso de azitromicina oral en combinación conbetalactámicos se asoció a una mayor tasa de cura precoz y menor estadía hospitalaria, sugiriendo una resolución clínica acelerada de la neumonía.

Background and objectives: To date, no randomized trials support the recommendation of combination therapy for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The aim of the pilot study was to determine the clinical efficacy of the addition of a macrolide as part of anempirical therapy of patients with CAP.Methods: Sixty-two patients admitted for non-severe CAP were randomized into two double-blind groups: intravenous ampicillin/sulbactam plus oral azithromycin (n=32) versusintravenous ampicillin/sulbactam plus placebo (n=30). The primary end point was early cure, evaluated at 5th day, and defined as 1) discharge before 5th day; or 2) clinical stability without changes in the antibiotic therapy. The secondary end points were lengthof stay, treatment failure and mortality. Results: The early cure rate was higher in the macrolide group than in the placebo group (81% vs 53%) (p = 0.02), with a relative risk reduction of 60% (95% CI: 10 - 82%), anabsolute risk reduction of 28% (95% CI: 5 - 50%) and a needed number of 3 patients to be treated (95% CI: 2 - 18). The length of stay was shorter in the macrolide group (6.5 ±2.3 vs 8.5 ± 4.5 days, p = 0.027), and there were no differences in treatment failure (3 vs6 patients) or mortality. Conclusion: The use of oral azithromycin in combination with ampicillin/sulbactam wasassociated with a higher early cure rate and a shorter length of stay, suggesting an accelerated clinical resolution of CAP.