(Chest. 1999;115:9S-13S.)
© 1999
American College of Chest Physicians
Treatment of Community-Acquired PneumoniaIDSA Guidelines*
Jack M. Bernstein, MD
* From the Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center and the Department
of Medicine/Veterans Affairs Campus, Wright State University, Dayton,
OH.
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has published
guidelines for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).
Although Streptococcus pneumoniae remains the most common
etiologic agent, Chlamydia pneumoniae and Legionella
pneumophila are also important causes. For all suspected CAP
patients, particularly those requiring hospitalization, chest
radiographs are strongly recommended to confirm the diagnosis. The IDSA
guidelines, in contrast to those published by the American Thoracic
Society, emphasize the use of sputum Grams stain and culture in all
patients, whenever possible, to establish etiology. This information
can be used not only to guide therapy but also to track trends in the
etiologic pathogens for CAP and their antibiotic susceptibility. In
light of the better outcomes with the earliest possible interventions,
the IDSA recommends initial empiric antimicrobial therapy until
laboratory results can be obtained to guide more specific therapy.
Macrolides, doxycycline, and fluoroquinolones are suggested for primary
empiric therapy, since each has activity against common bacterial
pathogens and atypical agents. Detailed antibiotic recommendations are
made for various pathogens. For inpatients, attempts should be made to
cover Legionella and other common pathogenic bacteria. Alternative
antibiotics are recommended for patients with structural diseases of
the lung, penicillin allergy, or suspected aspiration pneumonia. Switch
to an appropriate oral antibiotic is recommended as soon as the
patients condition is stable and he or she can tolerate oral therapy,
often within 72 h.
Key Words: American Thoracic Society guidelines antibiotics community-acquired pneumonia empiric therapy etiology Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines
 |
Introduction
|
|---|
Our
understanding of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) has expanded
greatly over the past several years. Epidemiologic studies show that
the combined cause-of-death category of pneumonia and influenza ranks
sixth as the leading cause of death in the United States.1
From 1979 to 1994, the crude rate of pneumonia and influenza has
increased 59%. These increases weigh heavily on the elderly, who are
more susceptible to these diseases and are more likely to die from
them. The elderly accounted for 89% of all pneumonia and influenza
deaths in 1992.2
,3
Increasing death rates imply an increasing incidence within the
community, but estimates are hard to obtain because CAP is not a
reportable disease to state or federal agencies and is most often
treated on an outpatient basis.4
Estimates for the
incidence of CAP are 3.5 to 4 million cases per year, with up to 20%
of patients requiring hospitalization.5
Those who enter
the ICU suffer a 15 to 20% mortality rate.
 |
Etiologic Considerations
|
|---|
Most CAP cases that yield an identifiable pathogen are caused by
Streptococcus pneumoniae.6
Infection caused by
aspiration of contents of the oropharynx may yield a variety of
organisms. Although S pneumoniae accounts for a large
portion of the pneumonias, culture reveals an expanding list of
additional causes. Haemophilus influenzae and
Chlamydia pneumoniae are generally the third or fourth most
common organisms identified. Less common etiologic agents include oral
anaerobes, Staphylococcus aureus, Legionella
pneumophila, Moraxella catarrhalis, and Hantavirus
(Table 1
).
However, 30 to 60% of the CAP cases do not yield an identifiable
pathogen.7
When no pathogen is isolated, diagnosis rests
on clinical criteria, none of which are definitive.
The distribution of infective organisms varies in different age groups.
Figure 1
shows examples of how the percentages of pathogens change with patient
age. C pneumoniae is clearly an important pathogen for
younger patients, whereas S pneumoniae grows in significance
and Mycoplasma pneumoniae decreases for the elderly. L
pneumophila, however, is most prevalent among the 35- to
49-year-old age group.
 |
Existing Guidelines for CAP
|
|---|
The American Thoracic Society (ATS) and the Canadian Infectious
Disease Society have provided guidelines to help the clinician treat
CAP inpatients and outpatients.7
,8
By providing criteria
to stratify patients with the disease, these guidelines suggest when to
hospitalize the patient and what courses of therapy may be useful.
Patient stratification for outcome focuses on the severity of the
disease and underlying risk factors for poor clinical outcome.
The ATS guidelines stress the difficulty in acquiring specific
etiologic information and emphasize instead empiric treatment of the
disease. The ATS points out that the clinical presentations of patients
infected with the same pathogen often differ. Furthermore, early chest
radiographs may not show infiltrates or other signs of inflammation,
and radiographs may not provide enough information to differentiate
bronchitis or chronic bronchitis from CAP.4
,6
Attempts to
clinch a diagnosis by culturing an organism often fail. Indeed, a study
of 154 CAP patients using sputum culture, serologic tests, and
bronchoscopy was able to identify the pathogen only 51% of the
time.9
It is this type of result that prompted the ATS to
recommend an empiric approach to CAP therapy.10
 |
The IDSA Guidelines
|
|---|
The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), which has
recently reexamined the etiology and presentations of CAP, has proposed
new guidelines that may lead to more efficient care for CAP
patients.11
The guidelines seek to streamline decision
making for patient care and to encourage ongoing attempts to identify
the infecting organism. The objective is to rationalize antibiotic
therapy so as to maximize the chance of cure and minimize the
likelihood of inducing pathogen resistance.
Figure 2
diagrams the recommended treatment algorithm, emphasizing inpatient
management. Entry into the algorithm begins with a patient history
consistent with CAP. This history could include such obvious
considerations as cough, fever, and previous hospitalization for
pneumonia. Additional contributing risk factors for CAP include viral
infections, a compromised immune system, neutropenia, pulmonary edema,
altered consciousness, airway obstruction, and congenital pulmonary
abnormalities.4
At the outset, the IDSA guidelines strongly recommend a chest
radiograph for all suspected CAP patients to confirm the presence of
pneumonia. Radiographs are particularly valuable for CAP patients
admitted to the hospital, because they provide a baseline to assess the
subsequent progression or regression of pulmonary inflammation.
Clearly, patients with more CAP risk factors are subject to a higher
risk of mortality. The IDSA algorithm helps define which patients would
benefit from hospitalization. Clinical factors that are part of the
decision include respiratory failure, ARDS, mechanical intervention,
bilateral infiltrates or a > 50% increase in infiltrates, and a
worsening chest radiograph within 48 h of hospital admission.
Additional indicators of CAP severity include systolic or diastolic
hypotension, profound sepsis with end-organ dysfunction, and tachypnea
> 30 breaths/min. Although these factors can be part of patient
assessment, the factors considered need not be this complex. Farr et
al12
examined the prognostic power offered by 42 different
measurable clinical factors for CAP patient outcome.12
They found that three parameters offered the clinician the best
opportunity to predict patient mortality, specifically, tachypnea
> 30 breaths/min, BUN > 19.6 mg/dL, and diastolic BP < 60 mm
Hg.
Diagnostic studies available for evaluating the CAP patient are
summarized in Table 2
.
Baseline measurements include a chest radiograph, sputum Grams stain
(SGS), and optionally, a sputum culture for conventional bacteria.
Laboratory testing for inpatients should include a CBC count with
differential and a chemistry panel including glucose, serum sodium,
liver function, renal function, and electrolytes. In a hospital that
sees more than one HIV-positive patient per 1,000 hospital discharges,
an HIV serologic test should be run (with permission) for patients
between the ages of 15 and 54 years. Seriously ill patients who lack an
alternative diagnosis or have suggestive findings should also be tested
for Mycobacterium tuberculosis and L pneumophila.
The main difference between current ATS and IDSA guidelines lies in a
greater emphasis by the IDSA on establishing the etiology for each case
of pneumonia. The ATS views the relatively low information return from
SGS and culture as a reason to forgo these tests. The IDSA, however,
believes these etiologic tests not only help guide treatment in
individual patients, but also provide an essential sampling of the
communitys CAP patterns. Data from such tests allow detection of
changes in the source of infection and resistance patterns among
pathogens within the community.
These samplings are not enough, however, to quickly detect newly
emerging or resurgent infective organisms. The "Emerging Infections
Network" on the IDSA Internet site (http://www.idsociety.org)
provides a forum for the dissemination of information about the latest
trends recognized by clinicians specializing in adult or pediatric
infectious diseases.13
The Emerging Infections Network
provides an early warning system for the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention and other public health agencies.
The overall management goals of the IDSA guidelines pivot on the
rational use of the microbiology laboratory for both inpatient and
outpatient therapy. For outpatients, SGS is desirable, and culture for
conventional bacteria is optional. Hospitalized patients should have an
SGS and culture of both sputum and blood.11
Recommendations for therapy are pathogen directed. Hospitalization is
based on the available prognostic criteria, and antibiotic therapy
should begin as early as possible.
Approximately 80% of CAP patients will be treated as outpatients. The
IDSA guidelines call for a pathogen-directed therapy for these
individuals as well. Diagnostic studies should include a chest
radiograph and SGS. When the pathogen is unknown, empiric therapy
should include considerations of disease severity, the patients age,
clinical features, comorbidity, previous antibiotic therapy, and
epidemiology.
 |
Options in Antimicrobial Therapy
|
|---|
Options for antimicrobial therapy are continually evolving (Table 3 ).
For empiric therapy, the IDSA recommends macrolides, doxycycline, and
fluoroquinolones as suitable alternatives for primary therapy because
each has activity against common pathogens as well as many atypical
organisms. In serious cases of pneumonia (eg, in the ICU),
the fluoroquinolones, erythromycin, or azithromycin should be
supplemented with cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, or a
ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor to provide extended Gram-negative
coverage.11
Inpatient empiric therapy for particularly severe CAP should consider
Legionella and other pathogenic bacteria as possible sources of the
infection. The therapeutic program should be modified further for
patients with structural disease of the lung, penicillin allergy, or
suspected aspiration pneumonia.
Recent studies have shown that patients can usually be switched from IV
to oral therapy within 3 days, provided a good oral antibiotic is
available and that the patient is in clinically stable condition and
can tolerate the drug.14
Treatment for S
pneumoniae should generally continue for 7 to 14 days or until the
patient is afebrile for 72 h.11
Patients with
atypical pathogens should be treated for 10 to 21 days. Azithromycin is
a good choice for treatment of atypical pathogens, but its utility
against S pneumoniae depends on community susceptibility.
 |
When Patients Fail to Respond
|
|---|
The expected response to antibiotic therapy is an amelioration of
symptoms over the first 72 h. Some patients fail to respond to
initial empiric therapy or their conditions begin to deteriorate (Fig 3
).
When this happens, one must first question whether the initial
diagnosis was correct.6
If the diagnosis was correct, then
host issues, drug issues, or pathogen issues may be preventing a
successful response. Host issues include obstruction, foreign bodies,
inadequate immune response, or superinfection. Drug issues can include
choosing the wrong drug, errors in dosage or administration routes, or
an adverse drug reaction. Pathogen issues pivot on a correct
identification of the pathogen, which may not be bacterial.
 |
Conclusions
|
|---|
The recently published IDSA guidelines for the treatment of CAP
cover essentially all aspects of patient management. They begin with a
strong recommendation for chest radiographs and utilize the
hospitalization decision algorithm developed by Fine et
al.15
Diagnostic studies are strongly encouraged, even for
outpatients, to determine the etiology and allow pathogen-specific
therapy. Antibiotic recommendations for initial empiric treatment are
based on severity of illness and presence of risk factors. In addition,
specific antibiotics are recommended for a wide range of pathogens, to
assist in the switch from relatively broad-spectrum empiric therapy to
specific therapy. Guidelines are presented to assist in the decision of
when to switch from IV to oral therapy (often within 72 h), to
determine the overall length of therapy, and to assess patient
progress. Recommendations are made for the assessment of patients who
fail to respond to initial treatment. Pneumococcal and influenza
vaccines are recommended for those at high risk for CAP (ie,
> 64 years of age and those with underlying systemic illness),
consistent with current Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
guidelines. The IDSA guidelines are presented with rankings to indicate
the strength of each recommendation and the quality of the evidence
supporting that recommendation. These guidelines are currently being
integrated with the recently revised guidelines from the ATS to create
a single set of recommendations for the treatment of CAP.
 |
Appendix 1
|
|---|
Dr. Bernstein: With regard to prompt initiation of
therapy, there are data that show that the longer you delay the
initiation of anti-infective therapy, the longer the hospital stay.
This is the origin of the guideline for trying to initiate therapy in
the emergency department.
Dr. Segreti: One of the problems is what you consider
"prompt" initiation of therapy. This obviously has medicolegal
connotations.
Dr. File: We actually suggested that anywhere from 2 to
8 h was "prompt" in an early draft of the guidelines, but the
data to support the earlier number just were not there, so we took it
out. The point was we wanted to make sure that prompt initiation
occurred rather than waiting for the culture results. You should give
the antibiotics as soon as possible.
Dr. Bernstein: One quandary we face in empiric therapy is
the increasing macrolide resistance in the community. Doxycycline still
seems to be a reasonable drug, and the newer fluoroquinolones seem to
be active against the majority of pathogens. I am reluctant to
prescribe macrolides since with the increasing resistance we might
start seeing failures.
Dr. File: The issue here is that you need to have good local
susceptibility data. If you use a macrolide empirically for a
hospitalized patient, and the patient ends up with a pneumococcal
bacteremia, you should be able to determine macrolide susceptibility in
your laboratory if you are going to continue to use that drug. It
really depends on good microbiology, and a lot of hospitals do not do
that.
 |
Footnotes
|
|---|
Correspondence to: Jack M. Bernstein, MD, Department of
Medicine/Veterans Affairs Campus, Wright State University, PO
Box 927, Dayton, OH 45435; e-mail: bernstein@wsu-id.dayton.oh.us
Abbreviations:
ATS = American Thoracic Society; CAP = community-acquired
pneumonia; IDSA = Infectious Diseases Society of America;
SGS = sputum Grams stain
 |
References
|
|---|
- >US Dept of Commerce Bureau of the Census. Monthly vital statistics report. 1997; 45:2124
- . CDC. (1994) Pneumonia and influenza death ratesUnited States, 19791994. MMWR 44,535-537
- Ely, EW (1997) Pneumonia in the elderly: diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Infect Med 14,643-654
- Segreti, J (1996) Community-acquired pneumonia: new pathogens, new resistance patterns. Infect Med 13(suppl A),9-14
- Garibaldi, RA (1985) Epidemiology of community-acquired respiratory tract infections in adults. Am J Med 78(suppl 6B),32-37[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
- Marrie, TJ (1994) Community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 18,501-515[ISI][Medline]
- Niederman, MS, Bass, JB, Jr (1993) Guidelines for the initial management of adults with community-acquired pneumonia: diagnosis, assessment of severity, and initial antimicrobial therapy: American Thoracic Society: Medical Section of the American Lung Association. Am Rev Respir Dis 148,1418-1426[ISI][Medline]
- Mandell, LA, Niederman, M (1993) The Canadian community-acquired pneumonia consensus conference group. Can J Infect Dis 4,25-28
- Bates, JH, Campbell, GD, Barron, AL, et al (1992) Microbial etiology of acute pneumonia in hospitalized patients. Chest 101,1005-1012[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Gotfried, M (1996) CAP guidelines of the American Thoracic Society. Infect Med 13(suppl A),15-21
- Bartlett, JG, Breiman, RF, Mandell, LA, et al (1998) Community-acquired pneumonia in adults: guidelines for management. Clin Infect Dis 26,811-838[ISI][Medline]
- Farr, BM, Sloman, AJ, Fisch, MJ (1991) Predicting death in patients hospitalized for community-acquired pneumonia. Ann Intern Med 115,428-436[ISI][Medline]
- . Executive Committee of the Infectious Diseases Society of America Emerging Infections Network. (1997) The emerging infections network: a new venture for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 25,34-36[Medline]
- Ramirez, JA, Srinath, L, Ahkee, S, et al (1995) Early switch from intravenous to oral cephalosporins in the treatment of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Arch Intern Med 155,1273-1276[Abstract]
- Fine, MJ, Auble, TE, Yealy, DM, et al (1997) A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia. N Engl J Med 336,243-250[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Marston, BJ, Plouffe, JF, File, TM, Jr (1997) et al. Incidence of community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalization: results of a population-based active surveillance study in Ohio. Arch Intern Med 157,1709-1718[Abstract]
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. A. Drehobl, M. C. De Salvo, D. E. Lewis, and J. D. Breen
Single-Dose Azithromycin Microspheres vs Clarithromycin Extended Release for the Treatment of Mild-to-Moderate Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Adults
Chest,
October 1, 2005;
128(4):
2230 - 2237.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Knapp, C. W. Wieland, C. van 't Veer, O. Takeuchi, S. Akira, S. Florquin, and T. van der Poll
Toll-Like Receptor 2 Plays a Role in the Early Inflammatory Response to Murine Pneumococcal Pneumonia but Does Not Contribute to Antibacterial Defense
J. Immunol.,
March 1, 2004;
172(5):
3132 - 3138.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. A. Milo, W. Smucker, E. Logue, J. Orosz, M. G. Grimes, B. Bonyo, D. Dulle, and M. McNaughton
Shoot, Ready, Aim: Pneumonia Care Quality and Costs in a Community Hospital
American Journal of Medical Quality,
September 1, 2003;
18(5):
214 - 219.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. Gopal Rao, C. S. Mahankali Rao, and I. Starke
Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea in patients with community-acquired lower respiratory infection being treated with levofloxacin compared with {beta}-lactam-based therapy
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.,
March 1, 2003;
51(3):
697 - 701.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Menendez, D. Ferrando, J. M. Valles, and J. Vallterra
Influence of Deviation From Guidelines on the Outcome of Community-Acquired Pneumonia*
Chest,
August 1, 2002;
122(2):
612 - 617.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|