[Bacteriology of bronchial secretions. Proposals for a practical attitude in bacterial respiratory tract infections].

E Touaty, C Michelet, F Gerber, R Pariente
{"title":"[Bacteriology of bronchial secretions. Proposals for a practical attitude in bacterial respiratory tract infections].","authors":"E Touaty,&nbsp;C Michelet,&nbsp;F Gerber,&nbsp;R Pariente","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The inadequacy of the standard bacteriological method in the study of expectorations is unanimously accepted. Oropharyngeal contamination of specimens largely explains why this examination is a poor index of the causative organisms in bacterial respiratory infections. In a mixed clinical situation with few or non-specific signs of bacterial infection and of variable severity, the physician should answer two questions: 1) Is it a bacterial infection? 2) What is the causative organism? and their corollary: 1) Should one prescribe an antibiotic? 2) Which one? Only culture of blood or pleural fluid allow an accurate reply to these questions in about 50% of cases and they are the indispensable investigations of reference. Initial efforts undertaken to improve the standard examination of expectorations never overcome the stumbling block of oro-pharyngeal contaminations. The bacterial count of expectorated bacteria, a non traumatic method, represents some real progress. In 50% of cases it enables a predominant pathogen to be identified before any antibiotics are given. Bronchoscopy diminishes contamination, allows direct sampling and the inspection and biopsying of bronchial mucosal lesions and aids drainage in very suppurative disorders. Trans-tracheal puncture avoids oropharyngeal contamination in the majority of cases and appears to provide reliable results much more often. A pragmatic approach is recommended according to the clinical picture. Bronchial and limited alveolar infections which are well tolerated, heal without exception on blind antibiotic therapy. In suppurating infections (bronchiectasis, cavitating pneumonias), the yield and the reliability of the examinations are increased. Serious bacterial infections, by their extent or by their site, justify a more aggressive diagnostic and therapeutic attitude. It should be stressed, however, that death caused by inadequate antibiotic therapy remains the exception when one or two successive courses of antibiotics have been prescribed for the pathogens presumed responsible according to the clinical picture or found after one or more bacterial examinations.</p>","PeriodicalId":76480,"journal":{"name":"Revue francaise des maladies respiratoires","volume":"10 4","pages":"249-58"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1982-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revue francaise des maladies respiratoires","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The inadequacy of the standard bacteriological method in the study of expectorations is unanimously accepted. Oropharyngeal contamination of specimens largely explains why this examination is a poor index of the causative organisms in bacterial respiratory infections. In a mixed clinical situation with few or non-specific signs of bacterial infection and of variable severity, the physician should answer two questions: 1) Is it a bacterial infection? 2) What is the causative organism? and their corollary: 1) Should one prescribe an antibiotic? 2) Which one? Only culture of blood or pleural fluid allow an accurate reply to these questions in about 50% of cases and they are the indispensable investigations of reference. Initial efforts undertaken to improve the standard examination of expectorations never overcome the stumbling block of oro-pharyngeal contaminations. The bacterial count of expectorated bacteria, a non traumatic method, represents some real progress. In 50% of cases it enables a predominant pathogen to be identified before any antibiotics are given. Bronchoscopy diminishes contamination, allows direct sampling and the inspection and biopsying of bronchial mucosal lesions and aids drainage in very suppurative disorders. Trans-tracheal puncture avoids oropharyngeal contamination in the majority of cases and appears to provide reliable results much more often. A pragmatic approach is recommended according to the clinical picture. Bronchial and limited alveolar infections which are well tolerated, heal without exception on blind antibiotic therapy. In suppurating infections (bronchiectasis, cavitating pneumonias), the yield and the reliability of the examinations are increased. Serious bacterial infections, by their extent or by their site, justify a more aggressive diagnostic and therapeutic attitude. It should be stressed, however, that death caused by inadequate antibiotic therapy remains the exception when one or two successive courses of antibiotics have been prescribed for the pathogens presumed responsible according to the clinical picture or found after one or more bacterial examinations.

支气管分泌物细菌学。对细菌性呼吸道感染的实际态度的建议。
标准细菌学方法在痰液研究中的不足是公认的。口咽标本的污染在很大程度上解释了为什么这种检查在细菌性呼吸道感染中是一个很差的病原体指标。在混合的临床情况下,很少或非特异性迹象的细菌感染和不同的严重程度,医生应该回答两个问题:1)是否是细菌感染?2)什么是致病生物?以及他们的推论:1)应该开抗生素吗?2)哪一个?在大约50%的病例中,只有血液或胸腔液培养才能准确回答这些问题,它们是不可缺少的参考调查。最初为改善咳痰的标准检查所作的努力从未克服口咽污染的绊脚石。痰液细菌计数是一种非创伤性的方法,它代表了一些真正的进步。在50%的病例中,它能够在给予任何抗生素之前确定主要病原体。支气管镜检查减少污染,允许对支气管粘膜病变进行直接取样、检查和活检,并有助于在严重化脓性疾病中引流。经气管穿刺避免口咽污染在大多数情况下,似乎提供可靠的结果更经常。根据临床情况,建议采用实用的方法。支气管和局限性肺泡感染耐受性良好,在盲目抗生素治疗下无一例外痊愈。在化脓性感染(支气管扩张、空化性肺炎)中,检查的结果和可靠性得到提高。严重的细菌感染,根据其程度或部位,有理由采取更积极的诊断和治疗态度。然而,应该强调的是,当根据临床情况或在一次或多次细菌检查后发现可能导致死亡的病原体时,对抗生素治疗不充分造成的死亡仍然是例外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信