CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT00312741Updated Feb 27, 2009

Usefulness of Microbiological Tests in Community-Acquired Pneumonia

An observational study in Community-Acquired Pneumonia, sponsored by Hospital Arnau de Vilanova. Status unknown at 1 site in Spain. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2009-02-27.

Sponsored by Hospital Arnau de Vilanova · Observational

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Feb 2009), so the status shown — last known as Recruiting — may be out of date.
Study type
Observational
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
250
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The hypothesis is that community-acquired pneumonia is usually a monomicrobial infection. Therefore, early detection of the etiology allows to select the most active, narrow-spectrum, and cheap, and less toxic antibiotic agent.

Read the detailed description

In community-acquired pneumonia, identification of the etiologic agent has theoretically important advantages. For individual patients, it facilitates the administration of a targeted, narrow-spectrum antibiotic therapy that may improve the efficacy of treatment, and reduces risks of antibiotic-related toxicity. For the community, microbiologic results contribute to understanding the local microbial epidemiology of community-acquired pneumonia and the antimicrobial resistance patterns of pathogens, information that is essential in the instauration or modification of empiric treatment regimens.

Guidelines recommend that all admitted patients with community-acquired pneumonia should have a collection of two sets of blood cultures, a good quality sputum sample for Gram stain and culture, a sample of pleural fuid if present and, for severe patients, an urine sample for antigen detection. In contrast, several prospective studies (usually without include urinary tests) concluded that these microbiological studies have limited value in the management of patients admitted with community-acquired pneumonia.

In addition, microbiological studies could provide erroneous or incomplete information. Thus, investigations has showed false-positive results from pneumococcal antigen detection in urine caused by a frequent persistence of positivity after infection or a nasopharyngeal or bronchial colonization. Other authors suggested that community-acquired pneumonia is a polymicrobial infection; consequently, despite the detection of a true microorganism, treatment needs to be also addressed against other potential pathogenic agents.

The purpose of the study is to assess the clinical and the economic derived from the initial microbiological studies, including antigen detection tests in urine for Streptococcus pneumoniae and Legionella pneumophila, in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

The hypothesis is that community-acquired pneumonia is usually a monomicrobial infection. Therefore, early detection of the etiology allows to select the most active, narrow-spectrum, and cheap, and less toxic antibiotic agent.

02

Conditions studied

  • Community-Acquired Pneumonia

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • community-acquired pneumonia
  • microbiological tests
  • urinary antigen
  • selection of antibiotic treatment
03

In context

Pneumonia

2,044 studies on the registry are indexed under Pneumonia; 283 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 250 is above the median of 203 across 688 observational studies indexed under Pneumonia.

Browse Pneumonia studies →

Lead sponsor

Hospital Arnau de Vilanova is the lead sponsor of 15 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Age: 18 years and above
  • Clinical and radiological diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia
  • Informed consent of patient
  • Hospital admission

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Prior hospital admission (less than 15 days)
  • Alternative diagnosis at the discharge
  • Immunosuppression (HIV infection, immunosuppressive therapies, neutropenia)
  • Risk factors for unusual etiologies
  • Patient is pregnant
05

Study design

Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
250 participants (estimated)

Interventions

  • Procedureempirical versus microbiological guided treatment
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Clinical and economic consequences obtained with the antibiotic selection in basis to early mcrobiological results

Secondary outcomes

  1. Importance of polimicrobial etiology in community-acquired pneumonia

  2. Practice usefulness of urinary antigen detection tests in pneumonia

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Hospital Arnau de Vilanova
    Lleida, 25198, Spain
    • Miquel Falguera, M.D. · Contact · mfalguera@comll.es · 0034-973248100
    • Agustin Ruiz-González, M.D. · Sub investigator
    Recruiting
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 27, 2009, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT00312741
Lead sponsor
Hospital Arnau de Vilanova
First posted
Apr 11, 2006
Start date
Apr 2006
Completion
May 2008 (estimated)
Last update
Feb 27, 2009

Study contacts

Miquel Falguera, M.D.
Contact
mfalguera@comll.cat
0034-973248100 ext. 2679
Miquel Falguera, M.D.
principal investigator · Hospital Arnau de Vilanova (Lleida)

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Feb 2009. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion