Unravelling the complexity of ventilator-associated pneumonia: a systematic methodological literature review of diagnostic criteria and definitions used in clinical research

Abstract

Abstract Background Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a prevalent and grave hospital-acquired infection that affects mechanically ventilated patients. Diverse diagnostic criteria can significantly affect VAP research by complicating the identification and management of the condition, which may also impact clinical management. Objectives We conducted this review to assess the diagnostic criteria and the definitions of the term “ventilator-associated” used in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of VAP management. Search methods Based on the protocol (PROSPERO 2019 CRD42019147411), we conducted a systematic search on MEDLINE/PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL for RCTs, published or registered between 2010 and 2024. Selection criteria We included completed and ongoing RCTs that assessed pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions in adults with VAP. Data collection and synthesis Data were collected using a tested extraction sheet, as endorsed by the Cochrane Collaboration. After cross-checking, data were summarised in a narrative and tabular form. Results In total, 7,173 records were identified through the literature search. Following the exclusion of records that did not meet the eligibility criteria, 119 studies were included. Diagnostic criteria were provided in 51.2% of studies, and the term “ventilator-associated” was defined in 52.1% of studies. The most frequently included diagnostic criteria were pulmonary infiltrates (96.7%), fever (86.9%), hypothermia (49.1%), sputum (70.5%), and hypoxia (32.8%). The different criteria were used in 38 combinations across studies. The term “ventilator-associated” was defined in nine different ways. Conclusions When provided, diagnostic criteria and definitions of VAP in RCTs display notable variability. Continuous efforts to harmonise VAP diagnostic criteria in future clinical trials are crucial to improve quality of care, enable accurate epidemiological assessments, and guide effective antimicrobial stewardship.