ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Antibiotic Escalation Following Rapid Multiplex PCR Pneumonia Panel Testing in Intensive Care Patients with Severe Pneumonia: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesSevere community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) can be fatal and requires the rapid and appropriate administration of antibiotics. Rapid multiplex PCR pneumonia panels are widely used tools for antimicrobial de-escalation and stewardship; however, their role in driving antibiotic escalation in severe pneumonia requiring intensive care is less well characterized.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 288 adults with severe CAP who were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of a tertiary hospital and underwent lower-respiratory BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BFPP) testing between April 2023 and September 2024. The primary outcome was antibiotic escalation, defined as addition of an agent or a change to broader-spectrum therapy after the BFPP result, and its associated factors. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), and ventilator duration according to the antibiotic escalation.
resultsPatients were elderly (median 72 years old; 60.8% male) and critically ill (median SOFA 8; median APACHE-II 19; shock 49.0%; mechanical ventilation 56.9%). The panel was positive in 66.3% of cases, and results were obtained with a median turnaround time of 2 h versus 67 h for sputum culture. After the panel, antibiotics were escalated in 34.0% of cases, de-escalated in 2.8%, discontinued in 0.7%, and unchanged in 62.5%. Escalation was independently associated with resistance gene detection (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 3.15, 95% CI 1.71-5.82), panel positivity (aOR 1.97, 95% CI 1.02-3.80), and SOFA score (aOR 1.10 per point, 95% CI 1.01-1.19). Thirty-day mortality, in-hospital mortality, hospital LOS, ICU LOS, and ventilator duration did not differ between escalation and non-escalation groups.
conclusionsIn severe CAP requiring intensive care and managed with a comparatively narrow initial empirical regimen, panel testing was predominantly followed by antibiotic escalation rather than de-escalation, particularly when resistance genes were detected. No statistically measurable difference in clinical outcomes was observed, but the study was not powered to exclude any clinically meaningful benefit or harm of escalation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.