PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Antibiotics· 2026Q1

Ventilator-Associated Tracheobronchitis Versus Pneumonia Due to Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in Critically Ill Patients: Outcomes and Antimicrobial Treatment Patterns in a Two-Center Cohort

Montserrat Rodríguez-Gómez, Francisco Braojos, Carolina Parra Esteban, Stalina Frometa Carrillo et al.

Short summary

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP)/hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) due to Stenotrophomonas maltophilia in critically ill patients had a 4.06x higher odds of treatment failure compared to ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) (40.6% vs. 14.3%).

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP)/hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) due to S. maltophilia was associated with a 4.06-fold increased odds of treatment failure compared to ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT).
  • Therapeutic failure rates were 40.6% for VAP/HAP versus 14.3% for VAT in index episodes.
  • ICU mortality was numerically higher in the VAP/HAP group (46.9%) compared to the VAT group (25.7%).
  • In vitro active antimicrobial therapy was exploratorily linked to lower failure rates, but this requires confirmation.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is a common cause of lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in critically ill patients, but differences between ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (VAT) and ventilator- or hospital-acquired pneumonia (VAP/HAP) remain unclear. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between VAT and VAP/HAP and, secondarily, to explore antimicrobial treatment patterns and their association with treatment failure. Methods: We conducted a retrospective two-center cohort study of adults admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in Madrid, Spain, between August 2021 and December 2025 with clinically significant S. maltophilia VAT, VAP, or HAP. The primary analysis included only the first (index) episode per patient. Results: Sixty-seven patients contributed 90 episodes. Among index episodes, therapeutic failure was more frequent in VAP/HAP than in VAT (40.6% vs. 14.3%; absolute risk difference, 26.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.0–45.2; p = 0.026). In a parsimonious Firth’s penalized logistic regression, VAP/HAP remained associated with therapeutic failure (adjusted odds ratio, 4.06; 95% CI, 1.32–14.25; p = 0.014). Results were consistent after adjustment for SOFA score at infection onset and when the analysis was restricted to VAP. ICU mortality was numerically higher in VAP/HAP (46.9% vs. 25.7%). In an exploratory Firth’s model, laboratory-reported in vitro active antimicrobial therapy was associated with lower odds of failure (adjusted odds ratio, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05–0.72; p = 0.014); however, this exposure was susceptible to time-dependent bias, and empirical anti-S. maltophilia therapy, defined at treatment initiation, was not associated with failure (26.7% vs. 26.9%). Conclusions: The clinical and prognostic significance of respiratory S. maltophilia infection appears to differ by syndrome. VAP/HAP was associated with more therapeutic failure than VAT. The association between in vitro active therapy and lower failure was exploratory and requires confirmation, and no comparative effectiveness conclusions can be drawn for individual antimicrobial agents.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Antibiotics, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Critical Care and Intensive Care MedicineMedicine