SynthesisCritical care medicine2026
Inhaled Antibiotics to Treat Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Critical care medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adjunctive inhaled antibiotics should not necessarily be considered independently of the systemic antibiotic regimen.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Article
- Optimizing aerosol therapy in mechanically ventilated acute respiratory distress syndrome: a delivery-fidelity framework.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the effects of adjunctive inhaled antibiotics in treating ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov through May 31, 2025. STUDY SELECTION: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies comparing adjunctive inhaled antibiotics with placebo/blank or IV antibiotics for VAP treatment. DATA EXTRACTION: Two groups independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Analyses used random effects models. Subgroup analyses, meta-regression, trial sequential analysis, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation were performed. DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 32 RCTs in the primary analysis and 41 non-RCTs in sensitivity analysis. Compared with placebo/blank, inhaled antibiotics significantly improved clinical cure (16 RCTs; n = 1425; risk ratio [RR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.07-1.43) and reduced all-cause mortality (21 RCTs; n = 1855; RR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98), with consistent findings in sensitivity analyses including non-RCTs. These benefits were significant in VAP-only patients (clinical cure: 11 RCTs; n = 775; RR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.10-1.52 and all-cause mortality: 15 RCTs; n = 1152; RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.90), but not in studies including mixed pneumonia populations. Meta-regression confirmed VAP-only population as a significant effect modifier. Inhaled antibiotics also improved microbiological eradication (20 RCTs; n = 1805; RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.27-1.58) and reduced emergence of new drug resistance (four RCTs; n = 182; RR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.06-0.64). No differences were found in ICU length of stay, ventilator duration, or other adverse events. Compared with IV antibiotics, inhaled antibiotics shortened ventilator duration (three RCTs; n = 322; mean difference, -2.11 d; 95% CI, -3.73 to -0.49 d), and reduced nephrotoxicity (three RCTs; n = 292; RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.26-0.68).
conclusionsCompared with placebo/blank, adjunctive inhaled antibiotics improve clinical cure and microbiological eradication, and may reduce mortality, particularly in VAP-only patients. Exploratory analyses based on limited data suggest potential advantages over IV therapy, including shorter ventilator duration and lower nephrotoxicity, warranting further high-quality trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41837717What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.