help button home button
AJRCCM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by GERBEAUX, P.
Right arrow Articles by SAINTY, J.-M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by GERBEAUX, P.
Right arrow Articles by SAINTY, J.-M.

Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., Vol 157, No. 1, 01 1998, 76-80.

Diagnosis of nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients: repeatability of the bronchoalveolar lavage [In Process Citation]

P Gerbeaux, V Ledoray, A Boussuges, F Molenat, P Jean and JM Sainty
Service de Reanimation Medicale, Hopital Salvator, CHRU Marseille, France.

The repeatability of the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) was assessed prospectively in 44 mechanically ventilated patients with suspected nosocomial pneumonia. Two BAL were performed in the same lung area (contiguous segment) during two fibroscopic procedures performed with a thirty minute interval. All the bronchoscopies were performed by the same operator. The statistical analysis looked out for bias (MacNemar test), agreement, and repeatability (kappa test). In the 44 patients studied, the qualitative repeatability (i.e., presence or absence of bacteria) was excellent (95.4%). However, in the 16 patients having at least one positive culture, these results were more controversial. The quantitative repeatability for bacteria (same log10 for both BAL of the same patient) was the lowest of all the results (26.7%). The distinction between presence and absence of bacterial pneumonia (based on the 10[4] cfu/ml threshold) showed a repeatability of 75% with no bias, an agreement of 47% and a just-significant kappa test (test = 1.97; p = 1.96 for a 5% risk error). BAL seems to have excellent repeatability when sterile. Its repeatability when positive needs further studies to be assessed.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
F. Gauvin, J. Lacroix, M.-C. Guertin, F. Proulx, C. A. Farrell, A. Moghrabi, P. Lebel, and C. Dassa
Reproducibility of Blind Protected Bronchoalveolar Lavage in Mechanically Ventilated Children
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., June 15, 2002; 165(12): 1618 - 1623.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.Home page
J. Chastre and J.-Y. Fagon
Ventilator-associated Pneumonia
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., April 1, 2002; 165(7): 867 - 903.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ChestHome page
G. San Pedro
Are Quantitative Cultures Useful in the Diagnosis of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia?
Chest, February 1, 2001; 119(2_suppl): 385S - 390S.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Proc. Am. Thorac. Soc. Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
Copyright © 1998 American Thoracic Society
  ATS 2008 State of the Art Course