Evidence Hub

The relationship between the alveolar epithelial lining fluid concentration of intravenous plus inhaled polymyxin B and clinical efficacy in patients with pneumonia caused by carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli: a prospective cohort study

Lili Zhou, Dan-Jie Wang, Xueyong Li, Yu Cheng, Yiqin Lin, Qin-Yong Weng, Wen-Wei Wu, Xuanxi Huang et al.

BMC Infectious Diseases, 2025

Abstract

Nebulization combined with intravenous polymyxin B (PMB) for carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli (CRGNB) pneumonia still has a number of failures that may be related to insufficient alveolar epithelial lining fluid (ELF) concentration of PMB. This study aimed at determining the relationship between the alveolar ELF concentration of PMB and clinical efficacy after intravenous (IV) plus inhaled (IH) PMB. Seventy-five patients with pneumonia caused by CRGNB were treated with IH plus IV PMB. Alveolar lavage fluid was collected before and after nebulization, and ELF was calculated according to the urea dilution equation. Differences in clinical outcomes between patients with high and low peak and trough concentrations of ELF concentration of PMB were compared separately according to the ROC curve grouping strategy. The primary outcome was favorable clinical outcome. The secondary outcomes included microbiological outcome and time to bacterial eradication, time to renormalize body temperature, CRGNB-related and all-cause mortality, 28-day survival, length of hospitalization, inflammation marker levels and side effects related to PMB. Clinical efficacy and bacterial clearance were higher in the high ELF peak concentration group than in the low one (total efficacy: 94.44% vs. 48.72%, total bacterial clearance: 63.89% vs. 38.46%, both P < 0.05). The clinical effective rate was higher in the high ELF trough concentration group than in the low one (88.89% vs. 43.33%, P < 0.05).…

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.

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