Evidence Hub

Nosocomial lower respiratory tract infections in patients with immunosuppression: a cohort study

Reyes LF, Sanabria-Herrera N, Nseir S, Ranzani OT, Povoa P, Diaz E, Schultz MJ, Rodríguez A et al.

Annals of intensive care, 2025

1,060 participants · 7 citations

Abstract

Background: This post-hoc analysis of a multinational, multicenter study aimed to describe and compare clinical characteristics, microbiology, and outcomes between immunosuppressed and non-immunosuppressed patients with nosocomial lower respiratory tract infections (nLRTI). The study utilized data from the European Network for ICU-related Respiratory Infections, including 1,060 adult ICU patients diagnosed with nLRTI. Descriptive statistics were used to compare baseline characteristics and pathogen distribution between groups. A Cox proportional hazards model stratified by immunosuppression status was applied to assess 28-day mortality risk, adjusting for disease severity and key clinical variables.

Results: Immunosuppression was observed in 24.9% (264/1060) of the patients, and oncological conditions were the most common etiology of immunosuppression. Chronic pulmonary and cardiovascular diseases were the most frequent comorbidities. In both groups, Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the predominant microorganism, particularly affecting patients with immunosuppression (25.3% vs. 16.7%, p = 0.032). Cox regression model adjusted for disease severity (SAPS II), polytraumatized status, altered consciousness, and postoperative status, SAPS II remained a strong independent predictor of mortality, with each one-point increase associated with a 2.3% higher risk of death (HR: 1.023, 95% CI 1.017-1.030, p < 0.001). The analysis also revealed significant heterogeneity in mortality risk among…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, 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: 1,060 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