Evidence Hub

Early Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Comatose Patients to Prevent Early-Onset Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Meta-Analysis

Riccardo Antolini, Filippo Violini, R. Domizi, E. Damiani, E. Adrario, A. Donati, A. Carsetti

Antibiotics, 2026

735 participants

Abstract

Background: Early-onset ventilator-associated pneumonia (EO-VAP) is a frequent complication in comatose patients requiring endotracheal intubation. This systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis assesses the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in preventing EO-VAP in this population. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies enrolling adult comatose patients (GCS ≤ 8) requiring endotracheal intubation and reporting EO-VAP incidence, late-onset VAP, ICU mortality, 28-day mortality, or ICU length of stay were included. Studies without a control group or not focused on comatose patients were excluded. Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across three databases from inception to 31 March 2026. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for observational studies. Results: In accordance with Cochrane Handbook recommendations, only RCTs were included in the quantitative analysis. Five RCTs (735 patients) demonstrated a significant reduction in EO-VAP incidence with antibiotic prophylaxis (RR 0.46 [95% CI: 0.35–0.59], p = 0.001, I2 = 0%), with the strongest effect in neurological patients (RR 0.41 [95% CI: 0.32–0.53], NNT = 5.4). No significant effect on mortality was demonstrated. Bayesian analysis confirmed these findings (posterior median RR 0.44 [95% CrI: 0.33–0.59], P(benefit) = 100%). Limitations: The analysis was limited by the small number of RCTs and the absence of data…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 735 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