Skip to main content
Download PDF

Spectrum and antimicrobial resistance in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with pneumonia: a cross-sectional prospective study from Vietnam

BMC Infectious Diseases volume 24, Article number: 622 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Respiratory infections have long been recognized as a primary cause of acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AE-COPD). Additionally, the emergence of antimicrobial resistance has led to an urgent and critical situation in developing countries, including Vietnam. This study aimed to investigate the distribution and antimicrobial resistance of bacteria in patients with AE-COPD using both conventional culture and multiplex real-time PCR. Additionally, associations between clinical characteristics and indicators of pneumonia in these patients were examined.

Methods

This cross-sectional prospective study included 92 AE-COPD patients with pneumonia and 46 without pneumonia. Sputum specimens were cultured and examined for bacterial identification, and antimicrobial susceptibility was determined for each isolate. Multiplex real-time PCR was also performed to detect ten bacteria and seven viruses.

Results

The detection rates of pathogens in AE-COPD patients with pneumonia were 92.39%, compared to 86.96% in those without pneumonia. A total of 26 pathogenic species were identified, showing no significant difference in distribution between the two groups. The predominant bacteria included Klebsiella pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis, and Streptococcus pneumoniae, followed by Acinetobacter baumannii and Streptococcus mitis. There was a slight difference in antibiotic resistance between bacteria isolated from two groups. The frequency of H. influenzae was notably greater in AE-COPD patients who experienced respiratory failure (21.92%) than in those who did not (9.23%). S. pneumoniae was more common in patients with stage I (44.44%) or IV (36.36%) COPD than in patients with stage II (17.39%) or III (9.72%) disease. ROC curve analysis revealed that C-reactive protein (CRP) levels could distinguish patients with AE-COPD with and without pneumonia (AUC = 0.78).

Conclusion

Gram-negative bacteria still play a key role in the etiology of AE-COPD patients, regardless of the presence of pneumonia. This study provides updated evidence for the epidemiology of AE-COPD pathogens and the appropriate selection of antimicrobial agents in Vietnam.

Peer Review reports

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive lung disease characterized by airflow restriction and persistent respiratory symptoms [1]. It is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, accounting for more than 3.5 million deaths each year, with nearly 90% of deaths occurring in low- and middle-income countries. Exacerbations significantly contribute to this phenomenon [1]. In Vietnam, the prevalence of COPD is estimated to range from 7 to 10% [2,3,4]. Notably, more than half of COPD patients experience exacerbations, leading to hospitalization and increasing the economic burden on both individuals and the health system [3].

Acute exacerbations of COPD (AE-COPD) are defined as acute worsening of respiratory symptoms that result in additional therapy characterized by increased dyspnea and/or cough and sputum [5]. The cause of AE-COPD may be multifactorial and include respiratory tract infections (either viral or bacterial) and noninfectious factors (such as air pollution, meteorological effects, and comorbidities) [6]. Among these, bacterial infection is considered a primary risk factor for infective AE-COPD, the prevalence of which ranges from 26 to 81% [6]. The dominant bacteria isolated from the patients with AE-COPD were S. pneumoniae, H. influenzae, M. catarrhalis, A. baumannii, P. aeruginosa, and S. aureus [7]. In several studies, the presence of bacteria in AE-COPD patients has been correlated with sputum purulence and the presence of inflammatory markers associated with pneumonia [8, 9]. Pneumonia in AE-COPD remains controversial. However, it is noted that pneumonia frequently occurs in hospitalized COPD patients and has the potential to worsen the progression of COPD exacerbations [10]. It is often not recognized and tends to be underdiagnosed due to the similarity of symptoms to those of AE-COPD. This has implications for accurately stratifying risk and providing appropriate treatment for COPD patients [11]. Additionally, there is limited knowledge regarding the clinical characteristics and pathogenic differences between AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia [12, 13]. Conducting a comprehensive study on this matter could significantly enhance our understanding and refine treatment strategies for these patients.

Traditional techniques, such as sputum culture, primarily identify bacteria and their antibiotic susceptibilities. However, they are limited to detect viruses and atypical bacteria effectively [14]. In contrast, real-time PCR demonstrates notable efficacy in identifying respiratory viruses and a broader spectrum of bacterial strains, both typical and atypical. Nevertheless, its capability to solely detect antibiotic resistance genes [15], rather than complete resistance profiles, poses a limitation. Therefore, a combined approach utilizing both methodologies is advisable for comprehensive respiratory pathogen detection and antibiotic resistance assessment. Currently, more than 90% of AE-COPD patients receive antibiotics as the primary treatment, depending on the severity of both COPD and the exacerbation, irrespective of the presence or absence of pneumonia [8, 16, 17]. However, the efficacy of many of these drugs has become uncertain due to the emergence of resistant strains, which are the most common respiratory pathogens in different countries [16]. The selection of antibiotics is heavily influenced by the local prevalence of bacteria and their resistance [18]. Therefore, in addition to improving antimicrobial restriction systems [19], understanding this issue is essential for preventing disease progression and refining treatment protocols for the effective management of AE-COPD. To our knowledge, there is limited information available in the literature regarding the epidemiology and antibiotic susceptibility between AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia.

For the reasons mentioned above, our study aimed to determine the pathogenic distribution of COPD exacerbation between these two groups using both conventional culture and multiplex real-time PCR. We further analyzed the antimicrobial sensitivity of the isolates and their associations with several clinical characteristics as well as indicators of pneumonia among hospitalized AE-COPD patients at 108 Military Central Hospital, one of the largest hospitals in Vietnam.

Materials and methods

Patients and study design

This study was conducted among patients with AE-COPD admitted to 108 Military Central Hospital in Hanoi, Vietnam, due to acute respiratory illness. All participants underwent clinical examinations, laboratory tests, spirometry, and chest computed tomography (CT) within 24 h of admission. The diagnosis of COPD or AE-COPD, along with COPD-related evaluations in this study, followed the guidelines of the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) [5]. Pneumonia was defined according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines [20] and a prior study [11]. We excluded patients identified with an alternative cause at admission and those with immunosuppression. A total of 92 AE-COPD patients with pneumonia and 46 without pneumonia (as controls) were ultimately recruited from September 2020 to September 2023 for this cross-sectional prospective study.

Bacterial culture and identification

Sputum was collected and promptly processed within a maximum of 4 h if stored at 4 °C. Samples with fewer than 10 epithelial cells and/or 25 polymorphonuclear leukocytes per low-power field (×100 microscopy) were qualified and subsequently plated onto agar plates (blood agar, chocolate agar, and MacConkey agar) for culture. After 18–24 h of incubation at 37 °C under 5% CO2, the bacterial species were identified via colony characteristics and biochemical reactions using a Vitek® 2 compact system (bioMérieux, France) with GP ID cards. Isolates of the same species from one patient were considered to be a single isolate. The entire process strictly adhered to protocols described in the Manual of Clinical Microbiology [21].

Multiplex real-time PCR for bacterial and viral detection

Sputum samples were first homogenized with a mucolytic reagent (N-acetyl-L-cysteine), and nucleic acid was subsequently extracted using the SaMag nucleic acid extraction kit (Sacace, Italy) following the manufacturer’s protocol. The quality of samples was evaluated by measuring the optical density (OD) at 260 nm for DNA and 230 nm for RNA using a NanoDrop™ Spectrophotometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., MA, USA). Multiplex one-step real-time RT-PCR was performed on the CFX96™ (Bio-Rad, CA, USA) platform using the Allplex™ Respiratory Panel 1, 2, 3, and 4 kits (Seegene, Korea) according to their instructions and previous studies [22, 23] for the detection of Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Chlamydia pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila, and seven viruses, including influenza A/B virus, respiratory syncytial virus A/B, adenovirus, enterovirus, parainfluenza virus, rhinovirus, and coronavirus. In addition, an in-house multiplex real-time RT-PCR assay was used to identify common bacterial pathogens, including Klebsiella pneumoniae, Moraxella catarrhalis, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii following the standard methods in previous report [24].

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing

The positive samples with bacterial culture were further tested for antimicrobial susceptibility according to CLSI guidelines [25] and a prior study [26]. The bacterial colonies were first resuspended at turbidity levels specific to various microorganisms. The antibiotic susceptibility of these samples was subsequently tested using a Vitek® 2 compact system (bioMérieux, France) with appropriate ID cards according to the manufacturer’s instructions. The selection of antibiotic groups was based on the bacterial species and clinical relevance. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was automatically recorded and analyzed. MIC values were classified as sensitive (S), intermediate (I) or resistant (R).

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables are presented as the mean ± standard deviation (SD), while categorical variables are expressed as numbers and percentages. The comparison of characteristics between two groups was conducted by using a t test for continuous variables and a χ2 test and Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. To determine whether biomarkers could distinguish AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and area under the curve (AUC) calculation were performed. The significance level was set at a p value less than 0.05. All the data were statistically analyzed using SPSS version 25.0 (NY, USA).

Results

Baseline characteristics

The baseline characteristics of 92 AE-COPD patients with pneumonia and 46 controls are reported in Table 1. Among them, there were 77 (83.70%) and 43 (93.48) males, and the mean ± SD ages at admission were 76.86 ± 10.24 and 74.65 ± 9.28 years, respectively. There were no differences in the duration of illness, history of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) use, and group and stage classification of COPD between the two groups. The incidence of fever and respiratory failure was significantly greater in AE-COPD patients with pneumonia than controls (p < 0.01). The AE-COPD with pneumonia also had higher Modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea and COPD Assessment Test (CAT) scores (p < 0.01). We also investigated the severity of AE-COPD, and the results showed that the severe grade in the pneumonia group (65.22%) was significantly higher than that in AE-COPD only group (19.57%), p < 0.001. Similar phenomena were observed for the total white blood cell (WBC) count, neutrophil percentage, and C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT) levels, but not for eosinophil count, with p < 0.05.

Table 1 Characteristics of AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia
Full size table

Comparison of pathogen distribution between AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia

A thorough investigation of pathogen identification was conducted utilizing real-time RT-PCR and bacterial culture in AE-COPD patients in both groups. As shown in Table 2, real-time PCR detected pathogens in pneumonia and control groups at rates of 79.35% and 67.39%, respectively. Bacterial culture identified at rates of 54.35% and 65.22%, respectively. Overall, employing dual techniques in tandem resulted in pathogen detection rates of 92.39% in pneumonia patients and 86.96% in controls. We conducted a detailed analysis of the subgroups of detected pathogens. The majority of patients were positive for a single pathogen, comprising 69.41% (59/85) of patients in the pneumonia group and 75.00% (30/40) of those with only AE-COPD. Notably, single Gram-negative bacteria were the most prevalent with 52.94% (45/85) and 50% (20/40), respectively. However, there were no significant differences observed between these two groups (all p > 0.05) (Table 2). We also performed blood cultures for all participants. However, only one sample in each group was positive (Table S1).

Table 2 Pathogens detected in AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia
Full size table

Table 3 provides a comprehensive overview of the pathogen distribution detected by each method employed. Notably, according to both multiplex real-time PCR and bacterial culture analyses, K. pneumoniae, a Gram-negative bacterium, emerged as the most prevalent pathogen, accounting for 55.43% and 56.52% of pneumonia patients and controls, respectively. Additionally, other significant Gram-negative bacteria, such as H. influenzae, M. catarrhalis, and various Acinetobacter spp., were identified, even though with varying frequencies across the sampled population. Among the Gram-positive bacteria, S. pneumoniae was the predominant species and was detected in 17.39% and 15.22% of the samples within these two groups, respectively. Supplementary Gram-positive species included S. aureus and S. mitis, albeit in smaller proportions. Atypical bacteria and viruses were also detected. Furthermore, the presence of mixed bacterial and viral infections suggested that multiple infections were prevalent in AE-COPD patients. These findings underscore the importance of employing an integrated approach to yield more precise results and achieve a higher detection rate of pathogens, particularly through multiplex real-time PCR (see Tables 2 and 3 for details).

Table 3 Pathogen distribution between AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia
Full size table

Antibiotic susceptibility

To assess antibiotic resistance patterns and enhance the clarity of treatment strategies, we conducted comprehensive antimicrobial susceptibility testing on bacterial isolates, with a particular focus on the most prevalent pathogenic species. Due to the limited number of positive culture samples for H. influenzae and S. pneumoniae (Table 3 and S2, S3), the four species included in this assay were K. pneumoniae, M. catarrhalis, A. baumannii, and S. mitis (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

The antibiotic resistance profiles of bacteria isolated from the two groups. The percentage of resistance to standard antibiotic doses was determined for Klebsiella pneumoniae (A), Moraxella catarrhalis (B), Acinetobacter baumannii (C), and Streptococcus mitis (D). AE-COPD, acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Full size image

We observed a distinct reversal in the antibiogram analysis of K. pneumoniae. In the control group, all antibiotics except ampicillin, nitrofurantoin, and fosfomycin exhibited complete sensitivity, reaching up to 100%. However, in the patients with pneumonia, resistance to all antibiotics was evident (Fig. 1A). M. catarrhalis demonstrated susceptibility to ceftazidime and chloramphenicol in both groups, with rates exceeding 80%. However, variations in resistance emerged during testing with levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim. Notably, in the AE-COPD with pneumonia patients, the percentage resistant to cefotaxime increased to 50% compared to that in controls, which maintained full sensitivity (Fig. 1B). A. baumannii, a Gram-negative bacterium, has become a cause for concern due to its alarming antibiotic resistance to cefepime, ceftazidime, piperacillin, and piperacillin/tazobactam in both cohorts. Interestingly, while several antibiotics, including ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and ticarcillin/clavulanic acid, were still effective at treating AE-COPD only patients, their effectiveness significantly decreased to 60% in the presence of pneumonia (Fig. 1C).

Additionally, an antibiogram was generated for S. mitis, a Gram-positive bacterium predominantly identified in this study through the sputum culture method ( (Fig. 1D). Our findings revealed that vancomycin, linezolid, tigecycline, chloramphenicol, penicillin, and ampicillin were effective at treating both groups of patients. However, some differences in antibiotic resistance between the two groups were observed. While benzylpenicillin, cefotaxime, cefepime, and ceftriaxone displayed higher resistance in AE-COPD with pneumonia, the susceptibility to clindamycin, erythromycin, levofloxacin, and tetracycline notably decreased in the group with only AE-COPD. These results suggested the nuanced response of bacterial strains to antibiotic treatments, particularly in the context of pneumonia in AE-COPD patients.

Associations with respiratory failure and stage of COPD

The relationships between several clinical characteristics of AE-COPD patients and the four most common bacteria are shown in Table 4. Among patients positive for K. pneumoniae and M. catarrhalis, no significant differences were observed in respiratory failure status, stage and group of COPD, and severity of AE-COPD. Interestingly, the frequency of H. influenzae infection was notably greater in AE-COPD patients who experienced respiratory failure (21.92%) than in those did not (9.23%), with p = 0.042. Furthermore, a higher incidence of S. pneumoniae was observed among patients with stage I (44.44%) or IV (36.36%) COPD than among those with stage II (17.39%) or III (9.72%) disease, with a p value of 0.014.

Table 4 Associations between several clinical characteristics and the top four most prevalent bacteria detected in AE-COPD patients
Full size table

CRP level as a marker of pneumonia in AE-COPD patients

To evaluate whether certain biomarkers can differentiate between AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia, we performed a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis (Fig. 2). CRP, PCT, and WBC count were utilized to identify pneumonia patients. The findings revealed that the CRP concentration exhibited substantial discriminatory power for distinguishing between pneumonia patients and controls (AUC = 0.78, p < 0.001). Conversely, the discriminative ability of PCT and WBC count was comparatively weaker, with AUC values of 0.66 and 0.67 (p = 0.001), respectively. The calculated cutoff point for CRP was determined to be 40.8 mg/dL, achieving a sensitivity of 56% and specificity of 87% in diagnosing pneumonia.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Diagnostic performance of several biomarkers for distinguishing between AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia. WBC, white blood cell; CRP, C-reactive protein; PCT, procalcitonin

Full size image

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first investigation on pathogens among AE-COPD patients in Vietnam, with a comparison between those with and without pneumonia. The relationship between AE-COPD and pneumonia is indeed intricate; pneumonia is sometimes perceived as a potential cause of AE-COPD [27, 28], while others view it as a distinct clinical and pathological entity [29, 30]. Moreover, pneumonia tends to be underdiagnosed in COPD patients. This misdiagnosis could lead to the inappropriate use of inhaled corticosteroids and consequently result in worsened outcomes [10, 11]. Hence, our research significantly contributes to this area. We detected infections in 92.39% and 86.96% of patients with pneumonia and controls, respectively. Infection rates in AE-COPD patients vary across different countries. For instance, in Korea, 55.3% of cases were affected [31], while in China, bacterial infections accounted for 34.28% [15]. In the UK, among admissions where a sputum sample was collected, 24.6% had bacterial growth, and 46.7% tested positive for viral infections [32]. Additionally, a year-long prospective epidemiological study conducted in the Asia-Pacific region, including Hong Kong, the Philippines, South Korea, and Taiwan, revealed that during AE-COPD visits, bacterial pathogens were prevalent in 78.0% and 74.7% of sputum samples analyzed via culture and real-time PCR, respectively [33]. It seems possible that our relatively higher rates are due to regional variation and the application of dual techniques.

The present study identified K. pneumoniae, H. influenzae, and M. catarrhalis as the most common bacteria detected, followed by S. pneumoniae and S. mitis in both groups. These results suggest that Gram-negative bacteria may be the predominant cause of AE-COPD in Vietnam. These align with studies conducted in China [15], the Philippines [33], South Korea [33], and Taiwan [33, 34]. However, these findings differ significantly from those in Hong Kong [33] and Western countries such as the UK [32], where community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) (H. influenzae, S. pneumoniae, and M. catarrhalis) was associated with AE-COPD. Interestingly, these outcomes are contrary to those of Mood et al. in India [35] and Mussema et al. in Ethiopia [36]. These authors found that the most common bacterial isolate was P. aeruginosa, followed by K. pneumoniae and either S. pneumoniae or S. aureus. Viruses also play a significant role in emergency admissions for COPD. A multicenter study conducted in South Korea revealed that viruses were identified in 33.2% of AE-COPD patients, with 10.9% showing bacterial and viral coinfections [31]. Other reports also showed a notably high percentage of positive virus samples (46.7%) in the UK [32] and 35.6% in the Asia-Pacific region [33]. Almost all the studies reported influenza as the most frequently isolated virus, followed by rhinovirus and respiratory syncytial virus. Consistent with the literature, this research also revealed influenza virus to be the most prevalent among the detected viruses.

In our study, real-time PCR identified seven typical and three atypical bacteria. Notably, K. pneumoniae, H. influenzae, and S. pneumoniae were more frequently observed by real-time PCR than by conventional sputum culture. This difference could be attributed to the potential reduction in bacterial numbers due to prior antibiotic use in some patients. Conversely, M. catarrhalis, A. baumannii, and P. aeruginosa were frequently detected by conventional sputum culture. In accordance with previous reports [33, 37], the current study has supported the significant enhancement of identifying the infectious cause of AE-COPD through the combination of real-time PCR with conventional methods, particularly by increasing the detection of atypical bacteria and viruses. Although microbiological culture has provided valuable insights into the sputum microbial composition in AE-COPD patients, identifying its inherent limitations is crucial. Challenges such as false negative results, cultivation biases, viability requirements, time-consuming procedures, and limited microbial diversity hinder the identification of specific pathogens and the acquisition of a comprehensive microbial profile [38]. Acknowledging these limitations, research advocates for increased integration of advanced molecular techniques, such as real-time PCR, to increase the sensitivity and detect specific DNA sequences related to pathogenic species. This could contribute significantly to its clinical diagnostic value [39].

The four common bacterial species isolated in the present study were opportunistic pathogens [15, 32,33,34, 37], which are known to cause a long-term disease course in AE-COPD patients. These bacteria have been observed to exhibit significantly varied antibiotic resistance profiles. In the control group, K. pneumoniae remained sensitive to almost all β-lactams tested, except for ampicillin. These findings align with those of Ma et al. (2015) [15] and Mussema et al. (2022) [36]. In contrast, K. pneumoniae showed resistance to this antibiotic group, including carbapenem among AE-COPD patients with pneumonia. This raises the possibility of different antimicrobial resistance mechanisms occurring in this microorganism, possibly due to β-lactamase production or modification of the antibiotic target through genetic mutations or post-translational modification [40]. In this study, M. catarrhalis demonstrated the highest resistance to levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin, followed by sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim, in both groups. This finding is quite different from those of several previous publications. Feng et al. (2013) reported that both β-lactams and fluoroquinolones were competently effective against this bacterium [41]. However, Smith et al. (2021) highlighted the high degree to which M. catarrhalis is resistant to β-lactam antibiotics [42]. According to the literature, H. influenzae, a fastidious bacterium, has specific and intricate growth requirements, posing challenges for conventional antibiograms in routine laboratory settings [43]. Additionally, S. pneumoniae exhibits various serotypes with distinct antibiotic susceptibilities, making it difficult to create universally applicable antibiograms [44]. These complexities are key factors limiting the study of antibiogram tests for these bacteria. Therefore, instead of focusing on H. influenzae and S. pneumoniae, our analysis included A. baumannii and S. mitis. While A. baumannii is a significant pathogen in nosocomial infections, community-acquired Acinetobacter infection is becoming increasingly important. This is due to antibiotic resistance and its impacts on patients with underlying comorbidities [45]. Indeed, our study, as well as previous reports [15, 41], noted that it was resistant to almost all tested antibiotics. Imipenem and meropenem remained the most powerful antimicrobial agents against A. baumannii, even though the resistance rates reached 43%. In case of carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii, a long course of colistin therapy serves as an alternative approach [46]. The outcomes of the antibiogram test for S. mitis between the two groups varied significantly in this study, leading to interesting findings (Fig. 1D). S. mitis is one of the normal flora in the oral tract and is the main pathogen of infective endocarditis. However, a significant increase in the incidence of S. mitis was noted in patients with the asthma-COPD overlap (ACO) phenotype [47]. Notably, its in vitro antimicrobial properties against respiratory pathogens have been determined [48], which could explain this observation.

As mentioned in the literature review [7], bacterial infections significantly worsen COPD exacerbations, and the prevalence of pathogens varies globally. Hence, our third research question delved into potential associations between clinical characteristics and common pathogenic etiologies in AE-COPD patients. Despite previous studies highlighting H. influenzae as a primary pathogen in acute exacerbations [7, 49], a comprehensive analysis of its role in pathogen-related characteristics has not been performed. The results we observed contribute to the existing database and stimulate further interest and consideration in this area. One study evaluated the clinical features and prognostic indicators of lower respiratory tract infections caused by H. influenzae and revealed a respiratory failure rate of up to 56% [50]. Furthermore, another study elucidated a distinct genetic profile in H. influenzae strains associated with exacerbations compared to those associated with asymptomatic chronic infection [51]. These findings suggest that complex interactions between host immunity and the pathogenicity of the infecting strain of H. influenzae may play a crucial role in determining the outcome of infection. Our data also revealed significant differences in the prevalence of S. pneumoniae among patients with various stages of COPD, with the highest incidence observed among patients with stage I and IV COPD. This finding is consistent with a previous report [52], which showed that S. pneumoniae is frequently present in early- and late-stage patients compared to those in the middle stage. The relationship between sputum bacteriology and COPD severity remains unclear. Factors reported to influence sputum bacteriology in AE-COPD include patient characteristics, antibiotic pre-treatment, current smoking status, duration between exacerbations, compliance with inhalation medication, and influenza vaccination [52]. Lin et al. [34] reported a greater incidence of K. pneumonia infection in patients with stage I COPD than in those with stage II, III, or IV COPD, while Ko et al. [53] highlighted a higher incidence of H. influenzae infection in patients with better lung function. Combined with our results, it is possible that the structural lung changes leading to the alteration in FEV1 are associated with the higher rate of bacterial load in the airway. These findings underscore the complexity of the bacterial distribution in AE-COPD patients and emphasize the need for a comprehensive investigation into the underlying mechanisms involved.

Another significant discovery in this study involved identifying indicators to distinguish between AE-COPD cases with and without pneumonia. The analysis of ROC curves revealed that, among the biomarkers evaluated, CRP was the most effective discriminator. These findings are consistent with the literature, which highlights CRP as a valuable biomarker for inflammation and infection, including pneumonia [54]. CRP is also known as an independent indicator of severity in patients with CAP [55]. Flanders et al. demonstrated that in adults presenting with acute cough, a CRP level ≥ 40 mg/L exhibited a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 90% in distinguishing between those with radiographically confirmed CAP and others [56]. Similarly, another study utilized a CRP value of ≥ 40 mg/L as a secondary diagnostic criterion for pneumonia [57]. In the present study, although the CRP concentration exhibited good specificity (87%), its sensitivity was relatively modest (56%). This finding suggested that relying solely on CRP levels may lead to missed pneumonia diagnoses in certain patients. The inconsistency may be due to the underlying mechanism of COPD, which is characterized by chronic inflammation. Therefore, clinical examination and consideration of other diagnostic factors remain essential.

There are several limitations to this study. The lack of microbiological data from various methods, such as serological tests, urine antigen assays, or nasopharyngeal lavage immunochromatography or immunofluorescence assays, may result in a less comprehensive analysis [8]. However, respiratory samples continue to be the primary choice for pathogen detection in AE-COPD patients. Furthermore, employing dual techniques in our study could enhance detection capabilities. Due to the small sample size of positive culture species, the current study did not allow for statistical analysis of antibiotic resistance between these two groups, however, it partially revealed differences between AE-COPD patients with and without pneumonia. Additional research is also needed to better understand the treatment outcomes of these groups. Nevertheless, our findings still hold potential utility in clinical practice.

Conclusion

This study provides comprehensive insight into the distribution of pathogens and antibiotic susceptibility and their associations with clinical characteristics among AE-COPD patients, both with and without pneumonia. These results could lead to valuable insights for developing effective treatment approaches, underscoring the importance of considering bacterial diversity and antibiotic responses during AE-COPD management. The efficacy of empirical antibiotic therapy also becomes a significant challenge. Hence, it is imperative for physicians and pharmacists worldwide to recognize the urgent need for rigorous surveillance and infection control strategies in combating the growing bacterial resistance. Continuous monitoring of bacterial sensitivity and resistance patterns is essential. Additionally, the study emphasizes the ongoing need for advancements in diagnostic methods.

Data availability

All data supporting the findings of this study are available within the paper and its Supplementary Information.

Abbreviations

AE-COPD:

Acute Exacerbations of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

CAP:

Community-acquired pneumonia

CRP:

C-reactive protein

PCT:

Procalcitonin

References

  1. World Health Organization. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). 2023. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/chronic-obstructive-pulmonary-disease-(copd). Accessed 27 Feb 2024.

  2. Lam HT, Ekerljung L, Tuong NV, Rönmark E, Larsson K, Lundbäck B. Prevalence of COPD by Disease Severity in men and women in Northern Vietnam. COPD: J Chronic Obstr Pulmonary Disease. 2014;11(5):575–81. https://doi.org/10.3109/15412555.2014.898039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Lim S, Lam DC, Muttalif AR, Yunus F, Wongtim S, Lan le TT, Shetty V, Chu R, Zheng J, Perng DW, et al. Impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the Asia-Pacific region: the EPIC Asia population-based survey. Asia Pac Fam Med. 2015;14(1):4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12930-015-0020-9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Nguyen T-A, Pham YN, Doan NP, Nguyen TH, Do TT, Van Vu G, Marks GB, McKinn S, Negin J, Bernays S, et al. Factors affecting healthcare pathways for chronic lung disease management in Vietnam: a qualitative study on patients’ perspectives. BMC Public Health. 2021;21(1):1145. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11219-4.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease. In: Global strategy for the diagnosis, management, and prevention of chronic obstructive lung disease (2023 Report). 2023. https://goldcopd.org/2023-gold-report-2/. Accessed 20 Feb 2024.

  6. Ko FW, Chan KP, Hui DS, Goddard JR, Shaw JG, Reid DW, Yang IA. Acute exacerbation of COPD. Respirology. 2016;21(7):1152–65. https://doi.org/10.1111/resp.12780.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Moghoofei M, Azimzadeh Jamalkandi S, Moein M, Salimian J, Ahmadi A. Bacterial infections in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Infection. 2020;48(1):19–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-019-01350-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Boixeda R, Rabella N, Sauca G, Delgado M, Martínez-Costa X, Mauri M, Vicente V, Palomera E, Serra-Prat M, Capdevila JA. Microbiological study of patients hospitalized for acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AE-COPD) and the usefulness of analytical and clinical parameters in its identification (VIRAE study). Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2012;7:327–35. https://doi.org/10.2147/copd.S30568.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Monsó E, Ruiz J, Rosell A, Manterola J, Fiz J, Morera J, Ausina V. Bacterial infection in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. A study of stable and exacerbated outpatients using the protected specimen brush. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995;152(4 Pt 1):1316–20. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.152.4.7551388.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Restrepo MI, Sibila O, Anzueto A. Pneumonia in patients with chronic obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2018;81(3):187–97. https://doi.org/10.4046/trd.2018.0030.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Finney LJ, Padmanaban V, Todd S, Ahmed N, Elkin SL, Mallia P. Validity of the diagnosis of pneumonia in hospitalised patients with COPD. ERJ Open Res. 2019;5(2). https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00031-2019.

  12. Søgaard M, Madsen M, Løkke A, Hilberg O, Sørensen HT, Thomsen RW. Incidence and outcomes of patients hospitalized with COPD exacerbation with and without pneumonia. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2016;11:455–65. https://doi.org/10.2147/copd.S96179.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Ruby D. The impact of community-acquired Pneumonia on Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients as regards In-hospital complications and early readmission. Open Respir Med J. 2020;14:10–5. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874306402014010010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang R, Wu Y, Deng G, Deng J. Value of sputum gram stain, sputum culture, and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid Gram stain in predicting single bacterial pathogen among children with community-acquired pneumonia. BMC Pulm Med. 2022;22(1):427. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12890-022-02234-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Ma X, Cui J, Wang J, Chang Y, Fang Q, Bai C, Zhou X, Zhou H, Feng H, Wang Y, et al. Multicentre investigation of pathogenic bacteria and antibiotic resistance genes in Chinese patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. J Int Med Res. 2015;43(5):699–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060515587577.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Miravitlles M, Mayordomo C, Artés M, Sánchez-Agudo L, Nicolau F, Segú JL. Treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and its exacerbations in general practice. Respir Med. 1999;93(3):173–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0954-6111(99)90004-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bagge K, Sivapalan P, Eklöf J, Hertz FB, Andersen CØ, Hansen EF, Jarløv JO, Jensen J-US. Antibiotic treatment in acute exacerbation of COPD: patient outcomes with Amoxicillin vs. amoxicillin/clavulanic acid—data from 43,636 outpatients. Respir Res. 2021;22(1):11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12931-020-01606-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Sharma P, Narula S, Sharma K, Kumar N, Lohchab K, Kumar N. Sputum bacteriology and antibiotic sensitivity pattern in COPD exacerbation in India. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberculosis. 2017;66(4):593–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcdt.2017.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wanla W, Katip W, Supakul S, Apiwatnakorn P, Khamsarn S. Effects of an antimicrobial restriction system on appropriate carbapenem use in a hospital without infectious diseases consultation. Int J Gen Med. 2017;10:443–9. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S145133.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Pneumonia in adults: diagnosis and management. 2023. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg191. Accessed 27 Feb 2024.

  21. Karen CC, Michael AP, Marie LL, Alexander JM, Robin P, Sandra SR, Warnock DW. Manual of Clinical Microbiology. 12th ed. Washington DC: ASM; 2019.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ranno S, Coltella L, Linardos G, Di Maio VC, Colagrossi L, Gentile L, Galeno E, Ciofi Degli Atti ML, Cristaldi S, Villani A, et al. Influenza viruses circulation in a tertiary care children hospital in Rome: a comparison between 2022 and the previous 5 years. Ital J Pediatr. 2023;49(1):121. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13052-023-01519-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Shin S, Koo S, Yang YJ, Lim HJ. Characteristics of the Mycoplasma pneumoniae Epidemic from 2019 to 2020 in Korea: Macrolide Resistance and Co-infection trends. Antibiot (Basel). 2023;12(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics12111623.

  24. Trung NT, Thau NS, Bang MH, Song LH. PCR-based Sepsis@Quick test is superior in comparison with blood culture for identification of sepsis-causative pathogens. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):13663. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50150-y.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Humphries R, Bobenchik AM, Hindler JA, Schuetz AN. Overview of changes to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing, M100, 31st Edition. J Clin Microbiol. 2021;59(12):e0021321. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00213-21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Katip W, Rayanakorn A, Oberdorfer P, Taruangsri P, Nampuan T, Okonogi S. Comparative effectiveness and mortality of colistin monotherapy versus colistin-fosfomycin combination therapy for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections: a propensity score analysis. J Infect Public Health. 2024;17(5):727–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2024.03.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Echevarria C, Steer J, Heslop-Marshall K, Stenton SC, Hickey PM, Hughes R, Wijesinghe M, Harrison RN, Steen N, Simpson AJ, et al. Validation of the DECAF score to predict hospital mortality in acute exacerbations of COPD. Thorax. 2016;71(2):133–40. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2015-207775.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Myint PK, Lowe D, Stone RA, Buckingham RJ, Roberts CM. U.K. National COPD resources and outcomes Project 2008: patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations who present with radiological pneumonia have worse outcome compared to those with non-pneumonic chronic obstructive pulmonary disease exacerbations. Respiration. 2011;82(4):320–7. https://doi.org/10.1159/000327203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Crisafulli E, Menendez R, Huerta A, Martinez R, Montull B, Clini E, Torres A. Systemic inflammatory pattern of patients with community-acquired pneumonia with and without COPD. Chest. 2013;143(4):1009–17. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.12-1684.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Huerta A, Crisafulli E, Menendez R, Martinez R, Soler N, Guerrero M, Montull B, Torres A. Pneumonic and nonpneumonic exacerbations of COPD: inflammatory response and clinical characteristics. Chest. 2013;144(4):1134–42. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.13-0488.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lee HW, Sim YS, Jung JY, Seo H, Park JW, Min KH, Lee JH, Kim BK, Lee MG, Oh YM, et al. A Multicenter Study to identify the Respiratory Pathogens Associated with Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in Korea. Tuberc Respir Dis (Seoul). 2022;85(1):37–46. https://doi.org/10.4046/trd.2021.0080.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Sivakumaran S, Alsallakh MA, Lyons RA, Quint JK, Davies GA. Estimating the contribution of respiratory pathogens to acute exacerbations of COPD using routine data. J Infect. 2023;86(3):233–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2023.01.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Taddei L, Malvisi L, Hui DS, Malvaux L, Samoro RZ, Lee SH, Yeung YC, Liu YC, Arora AK. Airway pathogens detected in stable and exacerbated COPD in patients in Asia-Pacific. ERJ Open Res. 2022;8(3). https://doi.org/10.1183/23120541.00057-2022.

  34. Lin SH, Kuo PH, Hsueh PR, Yang PC, Kuo SH. Sputum bacteriology in hospitalized patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in Taiwan with an emphasis on Klebsiella pneumoniae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Respirology. 2007;12(1):81–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1843.2006.00999.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Mood N, Katta SR, Badam AK, Chundru J. Clinico-bacteriological profile and antibiotic resistance pattern in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD. Egypt J Intern Med. 2022;34(1):13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43162-021-00094-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Mussema A, Beyene G, Gashaw M. Bacterial isolates and Antibacterial Resistance Patterns in a patient with Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease in a Tertiary Teaching Hospital, Southwest Ethiopia. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2022;2022:9709253. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9709253.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Shimizu K, Yoshii Y, Morozumi M, Chiba N, Ubukata K, Uruga H, Hanada S, Saito N, Kadota T, Ito S, et al. Pathogens in COPD exacerbations identified by comprehensive real-time PCR plus older methods. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:2009–16. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S82752.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Oon YL, Oon YS, Ayaz M, Deng M, Li L, Song K. Waterborne pathogens detection technologies: advances, challenges, and future perspectives. Front Microbiol. 2023;14:1286923. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1286923.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Fawley WN, Wilcox MH. Molecular diagnostic techniques. Med (Abingdon). 2005;33(3):26–32. https://doi.org/10.1383/medc.33.3.26.61126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Aurilio C, Sansone P, Barbarisi M, Pota V, Giaccari LG, Coppolino F, Barbarisi A, Passavanti MB, Pace MC. Mechanisms of action of Carbapenem Resistance. Antibiot (Basel). 2022;11(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics11030421.

  41. Ye F, He LX, Cai BQ, Wen FQ, Chen BY, Hadiarto M, Chen RC, Yuan JP, Sun HL. Spectrum and antimicrobial resistance of common pathogenic bacteria isolated from patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in mainland of China. Chin Med J (Engl). 2013;126(12):2207–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Smith D, Gill A, Hall L, Turner AM, Prevalence. Pattern, risks factors and consequences of Antibiotic Resistance in COPD: a systematic review. COPD. 2021;18(6):672–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.2000957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Schell RF, Le Frock JL, Babu JP, Robinson DB. Recovery of Haemophilus influenzae from twenty-three blood culture media. J Clin Microbiol. 1979;9(1):84–7. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.9.1.84-87.1979.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Li L, Ma J, Yu Z, Li M, Zhang W, Sun H. Epidemiological characteristics and antibiotic resistance mechanisms of Streptococcus pneumoniae: an updated review. Microbiol Res. 2023;266:127221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2022.127221.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Dexter C, Murray GL, Paulsen IT, Peleg AY. Community-acquired Acinetobacter baumannii: clinical characteristics, epidemiology and pathogenesis. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2015;13(5):567–73. https://doi.org/10.1586/14787210.2015.1025055.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Katip W, Rayanakorn A, Oberdorfer P, Taruangsri P, Nampuan T. Short versus long course of colistin treatment for carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii in critically ill patients: a propensity score matching study. J Infect Public Health. 2023;16(8):1249–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2023.05.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Mao X, Li Y, Shi P, Zhu Z, Sun J, Xue Y, Wan Z, Yang D, Ma T, Wang J, et al. Analysis of sputum microbial flora in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients with different phenotypes during acute exacerbations. Microb Pathog. 2023;184:106335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micpath.2023.106335.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Mathieu E, Marquant Q, Chain F, Bouguyon E, Saint-Criq V, Le-Goffic R, Descamps D, Langella P, Tompkins TA, Binda S, et al. An isolate of Streptococcus mitis displayed in Vitro Antimicrobial Activity and Deleterious Effect in a preclinical model of lung infection. Nutrients. 2023;15(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15020263.

  49. Finney LJ, Ritchie A, Pollard E, Johnston SL, Mallia P. Lower airway colonization and inflammatory response in COPD: a focus on Haemophilus influenzae. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2014;9:1119–32. https://doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S54477.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Kofteridis D, Samonis G, Mantadakis E, Maraki S, Chrysofakis G, Alegakis D, Papadakis J, Gikas A, Bouros D. Lower respiratory tract infections caused by Haemophilus influenzae: clinical features and predictors of outcome. Med Sci Monit. 2009;15(4):135–9.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Fernaays MM, Lesse AJ, Sethi S, Cai X, Murphy TF. Differential genome contents of nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae strains from adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Infect Immun. 2006;74(6):3366–74. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.01904-05.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Eller J, Ede A, Schaberg T, Niederman MS, Mauch H, Lode H. Infective exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: relation between bacteriologic etiology and lung function. Chest. 1998;113(6):1542–8. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.113.6.1542.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ko FW, Ng TK, Li TS, Fok JP, Chan MC, Wu AK, Hui DS. Sputum bacteriology in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD in Hong Kong. Respir Med. 2005;99(4):454–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmed.2004.09.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Su Y-J. The value of C-reactive protein in emergency medicine. J Acute Disease. 2014;3(1):1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2221-6189(14)60001-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Chalmers JD, Singanayagam A, Hill AT. C-reactive protein is an independent predictor of severity in community-acquired pneumonia. Am J Med. 2008;121(3):219–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2007.10.033.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Flanders SA, Stein J, Shochat G, Sellers K, Holland M, Maselli J, Drew WL, Reingold AL, Gonzales R. Performance of a bedside C-reactive protein test in the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia in adults with acute cough. Am J Med. 2004;116(8):529–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.11.023.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Andreassen SL, Liaaen ED, Stenfors N, Henriksen AH. Impact of pneumonia on hospitalizations due to acute exacerbations of COPD. Clin Respir J. 2014;8(1):93–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/crj.12043.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to our colleagues in the Department of Respiratory Diseases, Department of Microbiology, and Department of Molecular Biology, 108 Military Central Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam.

Funding

This work was financially supported by the Ministry of National Defense of Vietnam under contract number 03/2021/HDKHCN. The funding agency had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, and/or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Duy Tuyen Dao and Huu Y Le authors contributed equally to this work and share the first authorship.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Respiratory Diseases, 108 Military Central Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam

    Duy Tuyen Dao, Minh Hai Nguyen, Thi Duyen Thi, Xuan Dung Nguyen, Van Luan Pham & Dinh Tien Nguyen

  2. Graduate Institute of Biomedical Sciences, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Huu Y Le, Hang Nga Do & Jim-Tong Horng

  3. Faculty of Respiratory Medicine, 108 Institute of Clinical Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Hanoi, Vietnam

    Huu Y Le, Minh Hai Nguyen, Thi Duyen Thi, Van Luan Pham & Dinh Tien Nguyen

  4. Vietnamese-German Center for Medical Research (VG-CARE), 108 Military Central Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam

    Thanh Thuyet Bui, Thi Huyen Trang Tran & Huu Song Le

  5. Department of Microbiology, 108 Military Central Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam

    Thanh Thuyet Bui

  6. Department of Molecular Biology, 108 Military Central Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam

    Thi Huyen Trang Tran

  7. Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Jim-Tong Horng

  8. Research Center for Emerging Viral Infections, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Jim-Tong Horng

  9. Molecular Infectious Disease Research Center, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Jim-Tong Horng

  10. Research Center for Industry of Human Ecology and Research Center for Chinese Herbal Medicine, Graduate Institute of Health Industry Technology, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Jim-Tong Horng

  11. Faculty of Infectious Diseases, 108 Institute of Clinical Medical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Hanoi, Vietnam

    Huu Song Le

Authors
  1. Duy Tuyen Dao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huu Y Le
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Minh Hai Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thi Duyen Thi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Xuan Dung Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Thanh Thuyet Bui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Thi Huyen Trang Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Van Luan Pham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Hang Nga Do
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Jim-Tong Horng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Huu Song Le
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Dinh Tien Nguyen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conception and design of the study: DTD, HYL, HSL, and DTN; Sample collection: DTD, MHN, TDT, XDN, and VLP; Laboratory analysis: TTB and THTT; Data analysis: DTD, HYL, and JTH; Writing original draft: HYL and HND; Critical review and editing of the manuscript: HSL, DTN, and JTH. All the authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jim-Tong Horng, Huu Song Le or Dinh Tien Nguyen.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The protocol of this research was approved by the Review Boards of the Ministry of National Defense of Vietnam, as well as by the 108 Military Central Hospital. All patients provided written informed consent for this study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dao, D.T., Le, H.Y., Nguyen, M.H. et al. Spectrum and antimicrobial resistance in acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with pneumonia: a cross-sectional prospective study from Vietnam. BMC Infect Dis 24, 622 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09515-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09515-6

Keywords

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

Contact us