Evaluation of the multiplex PCR based assay Unyvero implant and tissue infection application for pathogen and antibiotic resistance gene detection in children and neonates

Rapid diagnostics for skin and soft tissue infections: the current landscape and future potential

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Managing antimicrobial therapy in patients with complicated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) constitutes a growing challenge due to the wide spectrum of potential pathogens and resistance phenotypes. Today, microbiological documentation relies on cultural methods. This review summarizes the available evidence regarding the clinical input of rapid microbiological diagnostic tools (RMDT) and their impact on the management of antimicrobial therapy in SSTI.

RECENT FINDINGS

Accurate tools are already available for the early detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in SSTI samples and may help avoiding or shortening empirical anti-MRSA coverage. Further research is necessary to develop and evaluate RMDT detecting group A streptococci (e.g., antigenic test) and Gram-negative pathogens (e.g., multiplex PCR assays), including through point-of-care utilization. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) methods could provide pivotal information for the stewardship of antimicrobial therapy, especially in case of polymicrobial or fungal SSTI and in the immunocompromised host; however, a shortening in the turnaround time and prospective data regarding their therapeutic input are needed to better appraise the clinical positioning of these promising approaches.

SUMMARY

The clinical input of RMDT in SSTI is currently limited due to the scarcity of available dedicated assays and the polymicrobial feature of certain cases. NGS appears as a relevant tool but requires further developments before its implementation in routine clinical practice.

Evaluation of Polymerase Chain Reaction in the Identification and Quantification of Clinically Relevant Bacterial Species in Lower Extremity Wound Infections

Identification of bacteria by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is known to be more sensitive than culture, which brings to question the clinical applicability of the results. In this study, we evaluate the ability of PCR to detect clinically relevant bacterial species in lower extremity wound infections requiring operative debridement, as well as the quantitative change in biodiversity and bacterial load reflected by PCR during the course of treatment. Thirty-four infected lower extremity were examined by analysis of 16S ribosomal RNA subunit and by culture. McNemar's test was used to measure the concordance of clinically relevant bacterial species identified by PCR compared to culture during each debridement. Change in wound biodiversity from initial presentation to final closure was evaluated by Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Kaplan-Meier survival curve was used to characterize change in measured bacterial load over the course of operative debridement. A total of 15 and 12 clinically relevant bacterial species were identified by PCR and culture, respectively. The most common bacterial species identified were Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, Staphylococcus aureus, and Enterococcus spp. PCR was less likely to detect Enterococcus spp. on initial debridement and Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus on closure in this study population. A significant decrease in mean number of clinically relevant species detected from initial debridement to closure was reflected by culture (p = .0188) but not by PCR (p = .1848). Both PCR (p = .0128) and culture (p = .0001) depicted significant reduction in mean bacterial load from initial debridement to closure. PCR is able to identify common clinically relevant bacterial species in lower extremity surgical wound infections. PCR displays increased sensitivity compared to culture with relation to detection of biodiversity, rather than bacterial load. Molecular diagnostics and conventional culture may serve a joint purpose to assist with rendering clinical judgment in complex wound infections.

Usefulness of a Multiplex PCR Assay for the Diagnosis of Prosthetic Joint Infections in the Routine Setting

Objective

To evaluate the usefulness of a multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay as a complementary tool in the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections in the routine setting of a clinical microbiology laboratory, with a special focus on patients at high risk of culture‐negative infections and high suspicion of infection.

Methods

The results obtained in the routine care setting with the use of the commercial multiplex PCR (Unyvero i60©, Curetis AG, Holzgerlingen, Germany) were retrospectively reviewed. The test was performed in samples of patients with suspected prosthetic joint infection, which were also processed for conventional diagnostic methods, including sonication of the implant when possible. Patients selected for the test were those with negative cultures after a 24‐h incubation period.

Results

Ninety‐nine PCRs were performed, 57 of which were diagnostic of infection according to 2018 MSIS criteria. Nine patients received antibiotics within the 15 days prior to the diagnostic procedure. Tested samples included synovial fluid (33), sonication fluid (56) and tissue biopsies (10). The PCR test detected microorganisms in 26 samples: including two cases of polymicrobial infection. Eleven patients were diagnosed by using PCR only. The most frequently detected microorganism in PCR was Coagulase‐Negative Staphylococcus in 11 samples, followed by Staphylococcus aureus in five. One sample was positive for the bacteria universal primer, included in the 2.0 version of the kit. Only one discrepancy was detected between a negative PCR and a positive culture. One sample was also positive for a resistance marker (detection of mecA gene in a case of methicillin‐resistant S. aureus infection).

Conclusion

The incorporation of the Unyvero ITI multiple PCR technique in patients selected by clinical experts is a useful tool for the diagnosis of bone and joint infections in a routine care setting. A close clinical‐microbiological collaboration improves the usefulness of this kit for the management of patients with these infections.

Ruling out underlying infection in 200 presumed aseptic knee and hip revision arthroplasties using a multiplex PCR system

Ruling out an infection in one-stage knee and hip revisions for presumed aseptic failure by conventional tissue cultures takes up to 14 days. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction (mPCR) is a quick test (4-5 h) for detecting pathogens. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of an automated mPCR of synovial fluid obtained intraoperatively in unsuspected knee and hip revisions. A prospective study was conducted with 200 patients undergoing a one-stage knee or hip revision. Synovial fluid was analyzed with the mPCR Unyvero implant and tissue infection G2 cartridge (U-ITI G2) system and compared to intraoperative tissue cultures. The primary outcome measure was the diagnostic accuracy, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV), of the mPCR U-ITI G2 system compared to conventional cultures. In the knee revision group, there were no patients with a positive mPCR in combination with positive cultures. This resulted in a non-calculable sensitivity and PPV. The specificity and NPV in the knee revision group of the mPCR compared to tissue cultures was 96.8% and 96.8%, respectively. In the hip revision group, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the mPCR compared to tissue cultures was 36.4%, 96.6%, 57.1%, and 92.5%, respectively. Sixteen mismatches occurred between the mPCR and tissue cultures. The mPCR U-ITI G2 system is a quick and reliable synovium fluid test for ruling out infection in presumed aseptic knee and hip revisions with a high NPV compared with tissue cultures, although some mismatches were observed. Periprosthetic tissue cultures are still advised as back-up for false negative and positive mPCR test results.

Spatio-Temporal Distribution of Acinetobacter baumannii in Germany-A Comprehensive Systematic Review of Studies on Resistance Development in Humans (2000-2018)

Acinetobacter (A.) baumannii has gained global notoriety as a significant nosocomial pathogen because it is frequently associated with multi-drug resistance and hospital-based outbreaks. There is a substantial difference in the incidence of A. baumannii infections between different countries and within Germany. However, its continuous spread within Germany is a matter of concern. A systematic literature search and analysis of the literature published between 2000 and 2018 on A. baumannii in humans was performed. Forty-four studies out of 216 articles met the criteria for inclusion, and were selected and reviewed. The number of published articles is increasing over time gradually. Case reports and outbreak investigations are representing the main body of publications. North Rhine-Westphalia, Hesse and Baden-Wuerttemberg were states with frequent reports. Hospitals in Cologne and Frankfurt were often mentioned as specialized institutions. Multiresistant strains carrying diverse resistance genes were isolated in 13 of the 16 German states. The oxacillinase blaOXA-23-like, intrinsic blaOXA-51-like, blaOXA-58 variant, blaNDM-1, blaGES-11, blaCTX-M and blaTEM are the most predominant resistance traits found in German A. baumannii isolates. Five clonal lineages IC-2, IC-7, IC-1, IC-4 and IC-6 and six sequence types ST22, ST53, ST195, ST218, ST944/ST78 and ST348/ST2 have been reported. Due to multidrug resistance, colistin, tigecycline, aminoglycosides, fosfomycin, ceftazidime/avibactam and ceftolozan/tazobactam were often reported to be the only effective antibiotics left to treat quadruple multi-resistant Gram-negative (4MRGN) A. baumannii. Dissemination and infection rates of A. baumannii are on the rise nationwide. Hence, several aspects of resistance development and pathogenesis are not fully understood yet. Increased awareness, extensive study of mechanisms of resistance and development of alternative strategies for treatment are required. One-Health genomic surveillance is needed to understand the dynamics of spread, to identify the main reservoirs and routes of transmission and to develop targeted intervention strategies.