Pneumonia, ventilator-associated (VAP)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| ICD10 Diagnosis | |
| Dx: | Pneumonia, ventilator-associated (VAP) |
| ICD10 code: | J95.88 |
| Pre-ICD10 counterpart: | VAP - Ventilator Associated Pneumonia |
| Charlson/ALERT Scale: | none |
| APACHE Como Component: | none |
| APACHE Acute Component: | none |
| Start Date: | |
| Stop Date: | |
| External ICD10 Documentation | |
This diagnosis is a part of ICD10 collection.
Additional Info
- Only code VAP if the #VAP Criteria are met completely.
Regarding the Date of Onset
- This guideline changed on October 15, 2024
- As before, the date of onset can really only be adjudicated in retrospect, as to be a VAP all criteria (see section below on "VAP Criteria") must be met within a 7 day "infection window period".
- This MAY NOT BE THE DAY it was first recognized as being present in real time by the medical team.
- Generally --- consider the date of onset of a VAP to be the date on which (assuming all criteria are met with a 7 day window period) the chest imaging study (e.g. CXR, Chest CT, etc) criterion was first met
- The one exception is when, for whatever reason, a chest imaging study was quite delayed -- and in that case consider the date of onset of the VAP to be the earliest date on which any of the other VAP criteria was met.
- Example: intubated patient had a CXR on Thursday showing a little wispy infiltrate on the CXR. In the absence of other signs or symptoms, on that day the team did NOT think it was infectious. But Friday the patient developed fever, leukocytosis and purulent sputum, AND the wispy infiltrate was now a big, dense consolidation. A sputum culture was sent on Friday for the first time. At this point the team began antibiotics for pneumonia. The thing here is that only in RETROSPECT did it become clear that the wispy infiltrate seen on Thursday WAS the start of the VAP. Thus, in this case the VAP appears to have clinically begun on Thursday, not Friday.
Infection Window Period
- The infection window period (IWP) is defined as the 7-days during which all site-specific infection criteria must be met. It includes the collection date of the first positive chest imaging study (date of onset), that is used as an element to meet the site-specific infection criterion, the 3 calendar days before and the 3 calendar days after.
Recent previous pneumonia
- An important CDC guideline is that if a pneumonia of any type is adjudicated to be present, then at least 14 days must pass from its onset before another/different pneumonia can be identified as being present.
- This holds even if the pathogens are different
- This holds even if chest imaging shows infiltrates in different areas of the lungs
- A relevant manifestation of this is if a patient is admitted with a pneumonia (so it's a CAP), and is intubated, the earliest a VAP may occur is on hospital day#14.
- If a patient had any pneumonia previously during the same admission and then develops pneumonia again, meeting the VAP criteria, it is only a VAP if:
- (i) onset was at least 14 days after onset of the previous pneumonia, and
- (ii) it is a new organism and has new and persistent or progressive and persistent infiltrates. If it is the same original organism, then the pneumonia has not completely been resolved, and you should NOT code it as a VAP.
|
|
Data Collection Instructions
VAP Criteria
- MUST MEET CDC CRITERIA AS FOLLOWS:
1 - Ventilated 48 hrs
VAP is an infectious pneumonia in a patient who, as of the day it showed itself (“day of event”) had been on mechanical ventilation (MV), either continuously or intermittently for at least 48 hours before onset of infection.
- The mechanical ventilation must be delivered via an endotracheal tube or tracheostomy.
- Although it is arbitrary, for this purpose we will consider "intermittent ventilation" to mean this: Over the 48 hours prior to the identification of the VAP, that the patient had been on the ventilator, via an ETT or trach, at least twice for periods of at least 1 hour each.
- Regarding whether ALL evidence/symptoms/signs of the pneumonia must be absent for the 48 hours after intubation for it to be called a VAP:
- The short answer is No for Criterion#2 but Yes for the Criteria#3,4 and 5, i.e. the respiratory symptoms/signs
- Example 1: The patient has had a pyelonephritis with leukocytosis and fever for the past 6 days. He got intubated 4 days ago and developed new respiratory signs and symptoms today, i.e. 72 hours after intubation. So even though Criterion#2 was present before the intubation and >48 hrs ago, the onset of the respiratory signs/symptoms were not present >48 hrs before intubation --- this IS a VAP.
- Example 2: The patient got intubated 4 days ago and developed new fever and leukocytosis yesterday (3 days after intubation). And while he has the required respiratory symptoms/signs, they developed just 24 hours after intubation. This is NOT a VAP, as the respiratory findings began <48 hrs after intubation.
2 - Infection
If not immunocomprised
- has at least ONE of the following 3 things:
- Fever > 38.0
- WBC<4000 or >12,000
- If >70 years old, altered mental status without another recognized cause
- Note that these symptoms/signs can be present without infection, but it's often difficult to tell which they're from. So if there is a VERY high level of belief that the fever or WBC changes are NOT due to infection, then don't count such criteria as being present. But in the absence of such high certainty then DO count them toward the VAP diagnosis. It's a judgement call.
If Immunocompromised
- There are different criteria for immunocompromised patients
- immunocompromised for this purpose defined as any of:
- neutropenia defined as absolute neutrophil count or total white blood cell count (WBC) <500/mm3
- leukemia, lymphoma or who are HIV positive with CD4 count <200
- have had a splenectomy
- history of solid organ or hematopoietic stem cell transplant
- on cytotoxic chemotherapy
- on steroids (excluding inhaled steroids) daily for >2 weeks on the date of event
- Immunocompromised, must have at least ONE of the following 8 things:
- Fever (>38.0°C)
- If >70 years old, altered mental status without another recognized cause
- New onset of purulent sputum, or change in character ofsputum, or increased respiratory secretions, or increased suctioning requirements
- New onset or worsening cough, or dyspnea, or tachypnea
- Rales or bronchial breath sounds
- Worsening gas exchange (for example: O2 desaturations, increased oxygen requirements, or increased ventilator demand)
- Hemoptysis
- Pleuritic chest pain
- immunocompromised for this purpose defined as any of:
3 - Chest Imaging indicators
- Chest imaging (X-ray, CT, etc) study or studies showing at least ONE of the following 3 things, that must be new & persistent OR progressive and persistent: (CDC WORDING CHANGE). Note: If the pt has had an ABD CT or AXR the radiologist will often comment on the lung fields.
- Infiltrate -- note that there are alternative words used for infiltrates, including "airspace opacities"
- Consolidation
- Cavitation
- Regarding the identification of "persistent" here:
- Because it is well recognized that there are many non-infectious reasons for fleeting infiltrates in intubated ICU patients (e.g. atelectasis), #3 - CXR indicators requires that the listed changes be either "New and Persistent" or "Progressive and Persistent". This necessarily means that there must be >1 CXR -- preferably over more than 1 day -- showing the "persistence".
- Although it is somewhat arbitrary, we will consider chest imaging findings to be "persistent" if they remain similar (i.e. do not disappear, or mostly disappear) in imaging studies done at least 6 hours apart.
- But, of course, ICU patients who are believed to have significant lung pathology, including pneumonia, typically DO have followup CXRs that will allow for identification of persistence of the changes seen.
- In the (relatively rare situation) in which a ventilated patient qualifies for a VAP except that NO CXR was done during the next couple of days to demonstrate persistence, you could point out to the physician(s) that the CDC criterion require infiltrates be persistent by chest imaging and therefore we would require a followup CXR to confirm the diagnosis. If there is severe resistance to this from the ICU team, you could refer them to Drs. Garland or Paunovic.
- Regarding the use of chest imaging interpretation ie. radiologist vs clinical team
- It is important to consider the overall clinical picture, if all of the VAP criteria are present use the interpretation of chest imaging that aligns with the clinical picture. ie If the radiologist interprets a CXR as atelectasis but the bedside team documents it as an opacity consistent with pneumonia, and the patient meets the VAP criteria then code it as a VAP.
AND
EITHER of #4 (respiratory indicators) OR #5 (alternative indicators)
4 - Respiratory indicators
Has at least TWO of the following 4 things:
- New onset of purulent respiratory secretions or change in amount or character of respiratory secretions.
- In general it is secretions from the lungs (tracheal secretions, BAL sampling) that is relevant here. In intubated patients, sputum secretions mainly represent the status of the oral, orophayngeal and upper tracheal mucosa, not the lungs.
- Increased ET tube suctioning requirements may be the sole indicator of such changes in respiratory secretions.
- In general it is secretions from the lungs (tracheal secretions, BAL sampling) that is relevant here. In intubated patients, sputum secretions mainly represent the status of the oral, orophayngeal and upper tracheal mucosa, not the lungs.
- New onset or worsening cough, or dyspnea, or tachypnea
- Newly identified adventitia, crackles or bronchial breath sounds.
- Worsening gas exchange -- e.g., O2 desaturations (e.g., PaO2/FiO2 <240, arterial blood gas or pulse oximetry), increased oxygen requirements, or increased ventilator demand
OR
5 - Alternative indicators
Has at least ONE item in #List 5a AND at least ONE item in #List 5b
List 5a
(This is the same list as #4 - Respiratory indicators, however, here it's just 1 item instead of 2 items)
- New onset of purulent respiratory secretions or change in amount or character of respiratory secretions.
- New onset or worsening cough, or dyspnea, or tachypnea
- Newly identified Rales or bronchial breath sounds.
- Worsening gas exchange -- e.g., O2 desaturations (e.g., PaO2/FiO2 <240, arterial blood gas or pulse oximetry), increased oxygen requirements, or increased ventilator demand.
OR
List 5b
- Organism identified from blood (see #VAP Pathogen exclusion list)
- Organism identified from pleural fluid (see #VAP Pathogen exclusion list)
- Virus, Bordetella, Legionella, Chlamydia or Mycoplasma identified from respiratory secretions or tissue by a culture or non-culture based microbiologic testing method
- In an immunocompromised patient: identification of matching Candida from blood and sputum, endotracheal aspirate, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) or protected specimen brushing. (This is a new CDC item)
- In an immunocompromised patient: Evidence of fungi (i.e. mycelia, not yeast) from BAL or protected specimen brushing)(This is a new CDC item). Be aware that fungi is not the same as yeast (do not use candida spp). https://www.cdc.gov/fungal/diseases/index.html
- Positive quantitative culture, performed according to accepted protocols, from BAL or protected brush specimens (see#VAP Pathogen exclusion list)
- According to Dr. Garland this very rare and he has never seen one done at HSC. Most bronchoscopies are not "quantitative" therefore not valid for use in the VAP criteria unless candida is cultured in immunocompromised patients only and only if the patient also has a matching blood culture.
- >5% of cells obtained from BAL contain intracellular bacteria on direct microscopic exam
- Positive culture of lung tissue (see #VAP Pathogen exclusion list)
- Histopathologic exam of lung tissue identifies abscess formation, or foci of consolidation with intense PMN accumulation in bronchioles and alveoli
- Histopathologic exam of lung tissue identifies lung invasion of fungal hyphae or pseudohyphae
- Fourfold rise in paired sera (IgG) for pathogen (e.g., influenza viruses, Chlamydia)
- Fourfold rise in Legionella pneumophila serogroup 1 antibody titer to ≥1:128 in paired acute and convalescent sera by indirect IFA.
- Detection of L. pneumophila serogroup 1 antigens in urine by RIA or EIA
VAP Pathogen exclusion list
- NEW CDC LIST (does not include candida b/c can be a valid pathogen in immunocompromised pts who have candida in both blood and ETT cultures (see list 5B, above)
- Normal respiratory flora
- Normal oral flora
- Mixed respiratory flora
- Cagulase-negative staph species (includes S. epidermidis, does not include S. aureus)
- Enterococcus species
- Blastomyces species (blasto)
- Histoplasma species
- Coccidioides species
- Paracoccidioides species
- Cryptococcus species
- Pneumocystis species
- Patients might be treated for infection with these pathogens, but do not code them as VAP. In that case you might be able to code it as a Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) in ICD10 or Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in ICD10.
- Being Colonized with organism (not infected) with MRSA does not exclude it from causing VAP, if they meet the listed criteria.
Sputum culture results do not qualify for VAP
- Endotracheal tube secretion / Sputum culture is not part of the CDC criteria defining a VAP because sputum is virtually never culture negative in intubated patients, even without infection.
- However, you can use culture results of respiratory secretions to identify the Pathogen for your ICD10 Diagnosis (though positive blood or pleural fluid culture is considered more definitive).
Determining if an aspiration becomes secondarily infected
Here are some thoughts about how to figure out whether or not an aspiration event becomes secondarily infected:
The usual time course after the aspiration, of development of the lung inflammation and signs related to it, is typically hours to a day or more. And it is considered distinctly RARE for an actual infection due to an aspiration event to develop that quickly.
The usual time course of starting to see movement towards resolution of the signs of lung inflammation from noninfected aspiration pneumonitis, in the absence of secondary infection, is a few days. So, when a person who aspirates and is appropriately NOT given antibiotics starts to improve substantially within a few days, we take that as clinical confirmation that it wasn't infected.
On the other hand, the most clearcut kind of clinical evidence for secondary infection of a noninfectious aspiration pneumonitis is when the person starts to get better, and then after several days starts to get worse again.
The hardest situation in which to determine if a secondary infection has occurred, and whether to start antibiotics, is when the signs of lung inflammation (infiltrate, fever, leukocytosis) doesn't improves and remains bad or worsens.
No such thing as "presumed VAP"
Following CDC criteria, we will not code "presumed VAP".
VAP supersedes other pneumonia codes
- If you identify a VAP, use this code instead of the codes for Pneumonia, bacterial, Pneumonia, fungal/yeast, Pneumonia, viral and Pneumonia, NOS.
| Example |
|
If the patient qualifies for having a bacterial VAP, you code the VAP linked to the pathogen, and you do NOT have to code Pneumonia, bacterial. |
- Data collectors should follow criteria listed below regardless of what a physician writes in chart. If patient meets criteria VAP below, code as VAP. If patient does not meet all listed criteria, then do not code as VAP. It may qualify as a HAP or CAP.
Instructions regarding the attribution of a VAP
We report Ventilator Associated Pneumonia Rate based only on Acquired Diagnosis / Complication occurring in a critical care unit. Whenever one of those exists, we also collect and report QA Infection VAP. To make sure we have optimal data for this, the Data Processor and the Statistician have processes to make sure nothing is missed.
Attribution of the VAP to a Hospital Location
- The infection is attributed to the location where the patient was on the date the infection became clinically evident -- EXCEPT if all elements of the infection are present within the first 48 hours of arrival, the infection is attributed to the location from which they were transferred.
- An important consequence of this is that if on admission to the current unit it was NOT recognized that the patient has a VAP, but by these rules it is then figured out to be so --> THEN the correct coding of this VAP is as an Admit Diagnosis, not an Acquired Diagnosis.
- The CDC case definition explicitly states that these rules should be followed -- that the physician’s statement of where the infection was acquired should not be substituted for these rules.
- A new VAP that is identified first on a medicine ward must be attributed to the ICU that sent the patient.
VAPs on medicine wards
- The only way VAP can be coded on a medicine ward is if -- as per #1 - Ventilated 48 hrs -- the patient's Mechanical Ventilation (MV) ended that day or the prior day in an ICU and patient met all the criteria.
- If the medicine collector identifies that a new pneumonia is present soon after arrival to the ward, they should let the ICU collector know to assess whether it was a VAP or not. VAP can be coded by the medicine collector as an Admit Diagnosis or Acquired Diagnosis following the usual rules, and should notify the sending ICU collector so they can ensure that the VAP is a Acquired Diagnosis for them and they have done the tmp information and notification process.
Long term ventilator patients with pneumonia
- If a LTV patient is admitted from the community with a pneumonia, a Community Acquired Pneumonia (Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in ICD10) should be coded, not VAP, even though it is technically a VAP.
- The rationale for this is that we only are wanting to tracking Hospital Acquired VAP's, not patients who have acquired an pneumonia while on long term home ventilators (LTV) in the community.
- Of course, if the patient entered the hospital without a pneumonia, and develops one (and meets the VAP criteria), then that person would have a VAP we do want to code.
Reporting of complication when patients move units
The Ventilator Associated Pneumonia Rate we report is based only on Acquired Diagnosis / Complication occurring in a unit. If VAP is coded as an Admit Diagnosis, we check if the patient came from one of the ICUs where we collect data, and if so, make sure that the VAP is coded as a Acquired Diagnosis / Complication and QA Infection VAP there.
If a VAP Admit Diagnosis doesn't have a corresponding Acquired Diagnosis / Complication in the previous unit, the data processor will ask the collector to audit.
Iatrogenic Guideline
Iatrogenic injuries
- Some iatrogenic codes are self-explanatory for what occurred. For example Iatrogenic, air embolism, as complication of line/infusion/transfusion/injection. But for others, such as Iatrogenic, puncture or laceration, related to a procedure or surgery NOS it's not clear what happened, i.e. what was iatrogenically injured.
- In these latter cases, with just one exception, DO NOT also code a trauma code for what was iatrogenically injured. This is because iatrogenic injuries are technically not considered to be traumas.
- that one exception is you should code Rib fracture(s) due to CPR in the context of CPR, cardiac resuscitation.
- Instead, combine the iatrogenic code with another ICD10 code indicating the body part involved.
- e.g. for iatrogenic laceration of a pulmonary artery, combine: Iatrogenic, puncture or laceration, related to a procedure or surgery NOS with Disorder of pulmonary vessels, NOS. See list of NOS codes in ICD10.
- In these latter cases, with just one exception, DO NOT also code a trauma code for what was iatrogenically injured. This is because iatrogenic injuries are technically not considered to be traumas.
Iatrogenic Infection
- These are infections that are related to medical care
- Most (but not all) are directly related to a medical device that predisposes the patient to infection
- e.g: ETT, vascular catheters, Foley, suprapubic catheter, implanted ortho devices, implanted cardiac devices, etc, etc.
- For the following three we have specific diagnostic (and attributional) criteria:
- Also see Nosocomial infection, NOS
Regarding Attribution and Identification of Surgical Wound Infections
- Note that these iatrogenic infections are attributed to the perioperative care for 30 days --- and for ONE WHOLE YEAR if related to an implanted device left in place
- Our reference for this is this (specifically pages 9-10 to 9-14), and describes 4 entities:
- SUPERFICIAL INCISIONAL SURGICAL SITE INFECTION
- DEEP INCISIONAL SURGICAL SITE INFECTION
- ORGAN/SPACE SURGICAL SITE INFECTION -- without an implanted device left in place
- ORGAN/SPACE SURGICAL SITE INFECTION -- with an implanted device left in place
- For your purposes of whether such an infection is considered a Admit Diagnosis versus Acquired Diagnosis, use the timing rules as above
- Here is an unusual consequence of this rule for surgical wound infections: Patient has a hip prosthesis put in 8 months ago. Admitted 1 month ago with pneumonia, and today is recognized to have an infection of that hip prosthesis. Despite the fact that the hip infection "seems" to have occurred well after this hospital admission, by the CDC rule it is actually a ORGAN/SPACE SURGICAL SITE INFECTION, and therefore it is attributed to the surgery one year ago, and so you should code it as a Admit Diagnosis even though the recognition of it was delayed for a whole month while in hospital.
Alternate ICD10s to consider coding instead or in addition
| Pneumonia codes: |
Candidate Combined ICD10 codes
Infections
Infections in ICD10 have combined coding requirements for some of their pathogens. Any that have antibiotic resistances would store those as Combined ICD10 codes as well. If the infection is acquired in the hospital, see Nosocomial infection, NOS. See Lab and culture reports for confirmation and details about tests. See Infections in ICD10 for more general info.
Possible Simultaneous Presence of Multiple Different Types of Infection in a Single Site
- This refers to the situation where there may be simultaneous infection with multiple types of organisms -- e.g. 2 of bacteria, virus, fungus. While a classic example is a proven viral pneumonia (e.g. influenza) with a suspected/possible bacterial pneumonia superimposed, this kind of thing can occur in places other than the lungs, e.g. meningitis.
- The "signature" of this is typically the patient being treated simultaneously with antimicrobial agents for multiple types of organisms. BUT don't confuse this with there being infections at DIFFERENT body sites.
- As per our usual practice, we will consider a diagnosis as present if the clinical team thinks it's present and are treating it, with the exception that the team initially treated for the possible 2nd type of infection but then decided it likely was NOT present and stopped those agents.
- And remember that Infectious organism, unknown is used when the the specific organism is unknown (this could be not knowing the TYPE of organism, or suspecting the type but not having identified the specific organism of that type), while when the organism has been identified but it's not in our bug list, THEN use Bacteria, NOS, Virus, NOS or Fungus or yeast, NOS.
Attribution of infections
Related CCI Codes
Data Integrity Checks (automatic list)
| App | Status | |
|---|---|---|
| Query check ICD10 Inf Infection req Pathogen must have one | CCMDB.accdb | implemented |
| Query Check Inf Pathogens must have Infection requiring pathogen or Potential Infection | CCMDB.accdb | implemented |
| Query s tmp QAInf tmp no dx | CCMDB.accdb | retired |
| Query check VAP admit must be from ICU | CCMDB.accdb | retired |
| Check VAP acquired only first encounter | Centralized data front end.accdb | declined |
| Query NDC VAP no TISS | Centralized data front end.accdb | declined |
| Query NDC VAP unacceptable date | Centralized data front end.accdb | retired |
| Query NDC VAP AcqDX but NoVAP DateinTMPV2 | Centralized data front end.accdb | retired |
| Query NDC VAP No AcqDX but VAP DateinTMPV2 | Centralized data front end.accdb | retired |
Data use
Used in:
Criteria change
The update in criteria in 2017-11 will likely lead to a higher rate of identifying VAPs. This needs to be noted in reports.
Related articles
Show all ICD10 Subcategories
Legacy
Use to be coded in TMP as QA Infection VAP. This was stopped 2019-Dec-31.