Nebulized antibiotics have an established role in patients with cystic fibrosis or bronchiectasis. Their potential benefit to treat respiratory infections in mechanically ventilated patients is receiving increasing interest. In this consensus statement of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, the body of evidence of the therapeutic utility of aerosolized antibiotics in mechanically ventilated patients was reviewed and resulted in the following recommendations: Vibrating-mesh nebulizers should be preferred to jet or ultrasonic nebulizers. To decrease turbulence and limit circuit and tracheobronchial deposition, we recommend: (a) the use of specifically designed respiratory circuits avoiding sharp angles and characterized by smooth inner surfaces, (b) the use of specific ventilator settings during nebulization including use of a volume controlled mode using constant inspiratory flow, tidal volume 8 mL/kg, respiratory frequency 12 to 15 bpm, inspiratory:expiratory ratio 50%, inspiratory pause 20% and positive end-expiratory pressure 5 to 10 cm HO and (c) the administration of a short-acting sedative agent if coordination between the patient and the ventilator is not obtained, to avoid patient's flow triggering and episodes of peak decelerating inspiratory flow. A filter should be inserted on the expiratory limb to protect the ventilator flow device and changed between each nebulization to avoid expiratory flow obstruction. A heat and moisture exchanger and/or conventional heated humidifier should be stopped during the nebulization period to avoid a massive loss of aerosolized particles through trapping and condensation. If these technical requirements are not followed, there is a high risk of treatment failure and adverse events in mechanically ventilated patients receiving nebulized antibiotics for pneumonia.

With an established role in cystic fibrosis and bronchiectasis, nebulized antibiotics are increasingly being used to treat respiratory infections in critically ill invasively mechanically ventilated adult patients. Although there is limited evidence describing their efficacy and safety, in an era when there is a need for new strategies to enhance antibiotic effectiveness because of a shortage of new agents and increases in antibiotic resistance, the potential of nebulization of antibiotics to optimize therapy is considered of high interest, particularly in patients infected with multidrug-resistant pathogens. This Position Paper of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases provides recommendations based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology regarding the use of nebulized antibiotics in invasively mechanically ventilated adults, based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature (last search July 2016). Overall, the panel recommends avoiding the use of nebulized antibiotics in clinical practice, due to a weak level of evidence of their efficacy and the high potential for underestimated risks of adverse events (particularly, respiratory complications). Higher-quality evidence is urgently needed to inform clinical practice. Priorities of future research are detailed in the second part of the Position Paper as guidance for researchers in this field. In particular, the panel identified an urgent need for randomized clinical trials of nebulized antibiotic therapy as part of a substitution approach to treatment of pneumonia due to multidrug-resistant pathogens.

Background Nebulization of antiinfective agents is a common but unstandardized practice in critically ill patients. Methods A systematic review of 1,435 studies was performed in adults receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. Two different administration strategies (adjunctive and substitute) were considered clinically relevant. Inclusion was restricted to studies using jet, ultrasonic, and vibrating-mesh nebulizers. Studies involving children, colonized-but-not-infected adults, and cystic fibrosis patients were excluded. Results Five of the 11 studies included had a small sample size (fewer than 50 patients), and only 6 were randomized. Diversity of case-mix, dosage, and devices are sources of bias. Only a few patients had severe hypoxemia. Aminoglycosides and colistin were the most common antibiotics, being safe regarding nephrotoxicity and neurotoxicity, but increased respiratory complications in 9% (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.18; I2 = 52%), particularly when administered to hypoxemic patients. For tracheobronchitis, a significant decrease in emergence of resistance was evidenced (risk ratio, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.64; I2 = 0%). Similar findings were observed in pneumonia by susceptible pathogens, without improvement in mortality or ventilation duration. In pneumonia caused by resistant pathogens, higher clinical resolution (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.30 to 2.96; I2 = 0%) was evidenced. These findings were not consistently evidenced in the assessment of efficacy against pneumonia caused by susceptible pathogens. Conclusions Performance of randomized trials evaluating the impact of nebulized antibiotics with more homogeneous populations, standardized drug delivery, predetermined clinical efficacy, and safety outcomes is urgently required. Infections by resistant pathogens might potentially have higher benefit from nebulized antiinfective agents. Nebulization, without concomitant systemic administration of the drug, may reduce nephrotoxicity but may also be associated with higher risk of respiratory complications.