Evidence Hub

PCR-based syndromic tests for antibiotic stewardship in non-ventilated patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia: a multicentre randomized controlled trial

S. Kernéis, E. Canouï, L. Deconinck, M. Dlela, S. Valade, B. Lortat-Jacob, C. Ollivier, L. Kardaś-Słoma et al.

JAC-Antimicrobial Resistance, 2026

55 participants

Abstract

Abstract Objectives To evaluate whether syndromic multiplex PCR (mPCR) with expert guidance improves antibiotic stewardship in patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). Methods We conducted a multicentre, open-label randomized controlled trial across seven French tertiary hospitals. Adults with non-ventilator-associated HAP in intensive care unit (ICU) or non-ICU wards were randomized (1:1) to conventional microbiology or mPCR testing. Empirical therapy was clinician-guided. In the intervention group, treatment was subsequently adapted according to mPCR results with expert advice. The primary endpoint was duration of broad-spectrum antibiotics (days of therapy/100 patient-days) in patients alive at end of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included appropriateness of antibiotic therapy, adverse outcomes, length of stay and costs. Results From February 2020 to August 2023, 116 patients were randomized and 109 included in follow-up (mPCR n = 55; control n = 54). Recruitment was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to early trial termination at half of the planned sample size. Median age was 66 years (IQR: 55–76), 66% patients were in ICU. Mean duration of broad-spectrum antibiotics was 37.6 days of therapy/100 patient-days (standard deviation, SD 44.1) in the mPCR group versus 48.7 (SD 54.5) in controls (P = 0.41). mPCR significantly increased appropriate antibiotic therapy at day 0 (47% versus 24%, P = 0.01). No differences were evidenced in adverse outcomes, length…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 55 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