Evidence Hub

Effect of procalcitonin-guided treatment on antibiotic use and outcome in lower respiratory tract infections: cluster-randomised, single-blinded intervention trial

Christ-Crain M, Jaccard-Stolz D, Bingisser R, Gencay MM, Huber PR, Tamm M, Müller B

Lancet (London, England), 2004

243 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lower respiratory tract infections are often treated with antibiotics without evidence of clinically relevant bacterial disease. Serum calcitonin precursor concentrations, including procalcitonin, are raised in bacterial infections. We aimed to assess a procalcitonin-based therapeutic strategy to reduce antibiotic use in lower respiratory tract infections with a new rapid and sensitive assay.

METHODS: 243 patients admitted with suspected lower respiratory tract infections were randomly assigned standard care (standard group; n=119) or procalcitonin-guided treatment (procalcitonin group; n=124). On the basis of serum procalcitonin concentrations, use of antibiotics was more or less discouraged ( or =0.5 microg/L or > or =0.25 microg/L), respectively. Re-evaluation was possible after 6-24 h in both groups. Primary endpoint was use of antibiotics and analysis was by intention to treat.

FINDINGS: Final diagnoses were pneumonia (n=87; 36%), acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (60; 25%), acute bronchitis (59; 24%), asthma (13; 5%), and other respiratory affections (24; 10%). Serological evidence of viral infection was recorded in 141 of 175 tested patients (81%). Bacterial cultures were positive from sputum in 51 (21%) and from blood in 16 (7%). In the procalcitonin group, the adjusted relative risk of antibiotic exposure was 0.49 (95% CI 0.44-0.55; p<0.0001) compared with the standard group. Antibiotic use was significantly reduced in all…

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: 243 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