Evidence Hub

Clinical outcomes for hospitalized patients with Legionella pneumonia in the antigenuria era: the influence of levofloxacin therapy

A. Mykietiuk, Jordi Carratalà, Núria Sabé, Jordi Dorca, Ricard Verdaguer, Federico Manresa, F. Gudiol

Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2005

80 participants · 141 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although the reduction in case-fatality rate recently observed among patients with Legionella pneumonia has been largely attributed to the progressive utilization of urine antigen testing, other factors, such as changes in empirical antibiotic therapy, may also have contributed. We have analyzed more-recent outcomes of Legionella pneumonia in an institution where urine antigen testing was reflexly performed in cases of community-acquired pneumonia without an etiological diagnosis. METHODS: From a prospective series of 1934 consecutive cases of community-acquired pneumonia in nonimmunocompromised adults, 139 cases of Legionella pneumophila pneumonia were selected for observational review. Legionella cases were analyzed for outcome with respect to antibiotic treatment, mortality, complications, length of stay, time to defervescence, and stability. RESULTS: The early case-fatality rate was 2.9% (4 of 139 patients), and the overall case-fatality rate was 5% (7 of 139 patients). One hundred twenty patients (86.3%) received an appropriate initial therapy, which included macrolides (i.e., erythromycin or clarithromycin) in 80 patients and levofloxacin in 40. Levofloxacin progressively replaced macrolides as the initial therapy during the study period. Compared with patients who received macrolides, patients who received levofloxacin had a faster time to defervescence (2.0 vs. 4.5 days; P<.001) and to clinical stability (3 vs. 5 days; P=.002). No differences were found…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a clinical trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 80 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free