Evaluation of the BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 panel and impact on patient management and antimicrobial stewardship

Rapid Detection of Pathogens and Resistance Genes Grown in Blood Cultures with Two Multiplex Tandem Real-Time PCR Kits

Objective

In this study, two multiplex tandem real-time PCR kits were used to rapidly diagnose common Gram-positive cocci and Gram-negative bacilli, detect their commonly seen antibiotic resistance genes, and evaluate the two kits' performance.

Materials and Methods

Gram-positive 12 (GP-12) kit (AusDiagnostics, Australia) and Gram-negative 12 (GN-12) kit (AusDiagnostics, Australia) were used in the study. Seventy-eight Gram-negative bacilli and 54 Gram-positive cocci grown in blood culture vials were applied to GN-12 and GP-12 panels. At the same time, the passages of the samples were made and incubated. After that, identification and antibiograms were made in the Phoenix™ automated system (Becton, Dickinson and Company, USA) and VITEK 2 Compact automated system (bioMérieux, France).

Results

Twenty-one Staphylococcus aureus, twelve coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), two Streptococcus pneumoniae, two Enterococcus faecium, and three Enterococcus faecalis were found to match the results from the automated GP-12 Kit. Pathogens present in the panel were successfully identified using the GN-12 kit. Both panels were found to be more effective in diagnosing polymicrobial infections.

Conclusion

These evaluated kits were rapid (approximately three hours) and valuable in identifying common sepsis pathogens and resistance genes. Thus, these tests can easily be used in the diagnosis of sepsis.

Performance of molecular tests for diagnosis of bloodstream infections in the clinical setting: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Rapid identification of bloodstream pathogens and associated antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profiles by molecular tests from positive blood cultures (PBCs) have the potential to improve patient management and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) of molecular tests from PBCs for detecting pathogens and AMR in the clinical setting.

METHODS

.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Cochrane, conference proceedings, and study bibliographies were searched.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies evaluating DTA of commercially available molecular tests vs. traditional phenotypic identification and susceptibility testing methods in patients with PBCs were eligible.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with PBCs.

TESTS

Commercially available molecular tests.

REFERENCE STANDARD

Traditional phenotypic identification and susceptibility testing methods (standard of care, SOC).

ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS

Study quality was assessed using Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.

METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

Summary DTA outcomes were estimated using bivariate random-effects models for gram-negative bacteria (GNB), gram-positive bacteria (GPB), yeast, GNB-AMR, GPB-AMR, and specific targets when reported by ≥ 2 studies (PROSPERO CRD42023488057).

RESULTS

Seventy-four studies including 24 590 samples were analysed, most of which had a low risk of bias. When compared with SOC, molecular tests showed 92-99% sensitivity, 99-100% specificity, 99-100% positive predictive value, and 97-100% negative predictive value for identifying total GNB (43 studies), GPB (38 studies), yeast (24 studies), GNB-AMR (35 studies), and GPB-AMR (39 studies). For individual pathogen targets, 93-100% sensitivity, 98-100% specificity, 86-100% positive predictive value, and 99-100% negative predictive value were estimated. Five of seven AMR genes had 91-99% sensitivity and 99-100% specificity. Sensitivity was lower for IMP (four studies; 62%; 95% CI, 34-83%) and VIM (four studies; 70%; 95% CI, 38-90%) carbapenemases, where genes were not detected or were not harboured in Pseudomonas aeruginosa (i.e. low prevalence). Performance of molecular tests in detecting AMR was generally comparable when grouped by geographical region (Europe, North America, and East Asia).

DISCUSSION

High DTA support the use of molecular tests in identifying a broad panel of pathogens and detecting AMR in GNB and GPB.

Evaluation of the filmarray blood culture identification panel on diagnosis of bacteremias in an MDRO-endemic hospital environment

The aim of the study was to evaluate the performance of the BCID2 FilmArray panel in relation to blood culture. 162 positive blood cultures were subjected to both classical microbiology methods and the FilmArray nested multiplex PCR. The BCID2 panel showed 96.7% sensitivity, 99% specificity and 99% accuracy.

Evaluation of the effect of BioFire FilmArray nested multiplex polymerase chain reaction method on rapid pathogen identification and antimicrobial stewardship in sepsis

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to assess the effect of the BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 panel on agent identification and antimicrobial stewardship in patients with a critical state of sepsis secondary to bloodstream infection.

METHODS

This study was designed as a prospective observational study. Patients who developed sepsis and septic shock secondary to bloodstream infection in the intensive care unit were included in the study. Concordance in both monomicrobial and polymicrobial results of Blood Culture Identification 2 panel and conventional blood culture, test result times, and antibiotherapy changes according to Blood Culture Identification 2 panel results were evaluated.

RESULTS

In monomicrobial samples, sensitivity and specificity were 97.1% (95%CI 84.6-99.3) and 100% (95%CI 66.3-100), respectively, for gram-negative pathogens and 85.7% (95%CI 42.1-99.6) and 100% (95%CI 90.2-100), respectively, for gram-positive pathogens. In polymicrobial samples, Blood Culture Identification 2 panel results were 79% in concordance with conventional blood culture results. In this study, when the final turnaround time of the Blood Culture Identification 2 panel was compared with culture results, the Blood Culture Identification 2 panel was on average 1 day, 5 h, and 35 min faster than the culture (p<0.01).

CONCLUSION

Blood Culture Identification 2 testing is a reliable tool for rapid pathogen and antimicrobial susceptibility detection in critically ill sepsis patients. The use of the Blood Culture Identification 2 panel in patients with sepsis and/or septic shock, where the transition to targeted antibiotherapy is critical, may improve patient outcomes.

Emergence of resistance to last-resort antimicrobials in bacteremia patients: A multicenter analysis of bloodstream pathogens in Korea

This study retrospectively reviewed the microbiological and clinical characteristics of patients diagnosed with bacteremia. Results from the first positive blood cultures were consecutively collected from July 2022 to June 2023 at a public secondary hospital, a university-affiliated tertiary hospital, and a university-affiliated secondary hospital in the Seoul metropolitan area. Antibiotic spectrum coverage (ASC) scores were calculated on the day the blood culture was performed (B0) and on two days after the blood culture results were reported (R+2). A total of 3,397 isolates were collected from 3,094 patients. Among these, 949 isolates obtained from 893 patients were classified as multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO), including 170 imipenem-resistant gram-negative bacteria, 714 methicillin-resistant staphylococci, and 65 vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Interestingly, 13 and 42 gram-positive isolates were resistant to linezolid and quinupristin/dalfopristin, respectively. Moreover, 44 and 181 gram-negative isolates were resistant to amikacin and tigecycline, respectively. The proportion of ASC scores corresponding to broad or extremely broad-spectrum coverage was not significantly different between MDRO and non-MDRO groups at B0 (p = 0.0925). However, it increased in the MDRO group at R+2 (p <0.001). This study found that resistance to last-resort antimicrobials is emerging. Therefore, developing and incorporating molecular diagnostics using a wide range of resistance targets may facilitate rapid, tailored antimicrobial treatments.

Reduced mortality with antimicrobial stewardship guided by BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 panel in critically ill patients with bloodstream infection: A retrospective propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether using the BioFire® FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification 2 panel (BCID2) leads to timely antimicrobial therapy and improves patient outcomes in critically ill patients with bloodstream infections (BSIs).

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included patients with BSIs admitted to the intensive care unit from July 1, 2021, to August 31, 2023. Patients were divided into groups receiving appropriate or inappropriate antimicrobial therapy. Those receiving inappropriate therapy underwent adjustments using standard-of-care (SOC) testing or BCID2. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed on the original cohort (Model 1) and a time-window bias-adjusted cohort (Model 2). Clinical impact of BCID2-guided antimicrobial adjustment was analysed in both models.

RESULTS

A total of 181 patients received inappropriate antimicrobial therapy, with 33 undergoing BCID2 testing and 148 undergoing SOC testing. Following PSM and time-window bias adjustment, 66 patients were analysed in Model 1 and 46 patients in Model 2. BCID2 significantly reduced the median time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy (40.8 vs. 74.0 h in Model 1; 42.8 vs. 68.9 h in Model 2) and the day-28 mortality rate (27.8% vs. 77.1%, P < 0.001 in Model 1; 23.5% vs. 58.6%, P = 0.021 in Model 2). In multivariate regression analysis, BCID2-guided antimicrobial adjustment was an independent prognostic factor for day-28 mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.07 in Model 1 and aOR 0.12 in Model 2).

CONCLUSION

BCID2-guided antimicrobial stewardship was associated with a shorter time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy and reduced day-28 mortality in critically ill patients with BSIs receiving inappropriate antimicrobial therapy.

The real-world impact of the BioFire FilmArray blood culture identification 2 panel on antimicrobial stewardship among patients with bloodstream infections in intensive care units with a high burden of drug-resistant pathogens

BACKGROUND

The increasing prevalence of drug-resistant pathogens leads to delays in adequate antimicrobial treatment in intensive care units (ICU). The real-world influence of the BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) panel on pathogen identification, diagnostic concordance with conventional culture methods, and antimicrobial stewardship in the ICU remains unexplored.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study, conducted from July 2021 to August 2023, involved adult ICU patients with positive blood cultures who underwent BCID2 testing. The concordance between BCID2 and conventional culture results was examined, and its impact on antimicrobial stewardship was assessed through a comprehensive retrospective review of patient records by intensivists.

RESULTS

A total of 129 blood specimens from 113 patients were analysed. Among these patients, a high proportion of drug-resistant strains were noted, including carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) (57.1%), carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter calcoaceticus-baumannii complex (100%), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (70%), and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) (100%). The time from blood culture collection to obtaining BCID2 results was significantly shorter than conventional culture (46.2 h vs. 86.9 h, p < 0.001). BCID2 demonstrated 100% concordance in genotype-phenotype correlation in antimicrobial resistance (AMR) for CRKP, carbapenem-resistant Escherichia coli, MRSA, and VRE. A total of 40.5% of patients received inadequate empirical antimicrobial treatment. The antimicrobial regimen was adjusted or confirmed in 55.4% of patients following the BCID2 results.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of a high burden of drug-resistant pathogens, BCID2 demonstrated rapid pathogen and AMR detection, with a noticeable impact on antimicrobial stewardship in BSI in the ICU.

[Detection of microorganisms and resistance genes from positive blood cultures using the FilmArray® BCID2 panel: Experience in a pediatric hospital]

The rapid identification of microorganisms that cause bacteremia and their possible resistance markers are extremely important for the timely initiation of effective antibiotic therapy. The FilmArray® panel BCID2 (an automated rapid multiplex PCR assay) detects microorganisms and resistance genes from positive blood cultures within one hour. The aim of this study was to compare the results obtained from the FilmArray® Panel BCID2 and conventional culture in pediatric patients, as well as the reporting times of both methods. Sixty (60) FilmArray® results were included in the analysis. BCID2 showed high agreement with culture in the identification of microorganisms in monomicrobial bacteremias. However, in polymicrobial blood cultures, BCID2 detected a greater number of microorganisms compared to conventional culture, specifically,1 Staphylococcus aureus, 3 Staphylococcus epidermidis, 1 Enterococcus faecium, 2 Klebsiella oxytoca, 1 Acinetobacter calcoaceticus-baumannii complex, 1 Bacteroides fragilis and 1 Haemophilus influenzae. Furthermore, 88.3% (95%CI: 78.7-94.8) of the FilmArray® results coincided with conventional culture, while in polymicrobial bacteremias, BCID2 detected a greater number of microorganisms with respect to conventional culture [70% (95%CI: 39.3-91.5)]. The agreement of resistance genes was good with a few exceptions (one ESBL was not detected by FilmArray® and one S. aureus strain was characterized as methicillin-resistant by BCID2 and methicillin-sensitive by culture). When comparing the time elapsing since the blood culture was reported as positive up to the results were obtained, BCID2 had a median of 2h 50min (IQR of 1 h 58min to 9h 27min) while the conventional culture had a median of 45h 20min (IQR of 24h 57min to 63h 50min).

Rapid Direct Identification of Microbial Pathogens and Antimicrobial Resistance Genes in Positive Blood Cultures Using a Fully Automated Multiplex PCR Assay

This study assessed the performance of the BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) panel in identifying microorganisms and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) profiles in positive blood cultures (BCs) and its influence on turnaround time (TAT) compared with conventional culture methods. We obtained 117 positive BCs, of these, 102 (87.2%) were correctly identified using BCID2. The discordance was due to off-panel pathogens detected by culture (n = 13), and additional pathogens identified by BCID2 (n = 2). On-panel pathogen concordance between the conventional culture and BCID2 methods was 98.1% (102/104). The conventional method detected 19 carbapenemase-producing organisms, 14 extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales, 18 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp., and four vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium. BCID2 correctly predicted 53 (96.4%) of 55 phenotypic resistance patterns by detecting AMR genes. The TAT for BCID2 was significantly lower than that for the conventional method. BCID2 rapidly identifies pathogens and AMR genes in positive BCs.

Clinical utility of multiplex PCR in the detection of pathogens from sterile body fluids

Rapid identification of pathogens in normally sterile body fluid (NSBF) is essential for appropriate patient management, specifically antimicrobial therapy. Limited sensitivity and increased time to detection of traditional culture prompted us to evaluate additional testing to contribute to the diagnosis of infection. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification (BCID) Panels on positive body fluids inoculated into blood culture bottles for the detection of microorganisms. A total of 88 positive body fluids from blood culture bottles were analyzed using a Gram-Positive, Gram-Negative, and/or Fungal pathogen BCID Panel based on the Gram stain result. Each result was compared to routine culture performed from the positive bottle. When using culture as a reference standard, we found the ePlex multiplex panel performed with a positive percent agreement of 96.5% and a negative percent agreement of 99.8%. The use of multiplex PCR may be a useful supplement to routine culture for NSBF in blood culture bottles.

IMPORTANCE

The identification of pathogens in normally sterile body fluid (NSBF) is performed using routine culture, the current gold standard. Limitations of this method include sensitivity and increased turnaround times which could potentially delay vital patient care, especially antimicrobial therapy. Adaptations of NSBF in blood culture bottles prompted us to consider the utility of additional methods to bridge the gap in diagnostic challenges for these life-threatening infections. Multiplex molecular panels have been manufactured for use with multiple specimen types including blood, cerebral spinal fluid, stool, and respiratory. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the off-label use of ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels on positive body fluids grown in blood culture bottles for the detection of microorganisms for research purposes.

The impact of the BIOFIRE® Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel on antimicrobial treatment of children with suspected systemic inflammatory response syndrome and sepsis

This study aimed to assess the therapeutic effects of implementing the BioFire® Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) Panel (bioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France) in the clinical practice of children with sepsis. This retrospective cross-sectional study included children from 15 days of age to 18 years old with sepsis and of whom the BCID2 Panel was studied from the positive blood culture. If the antimicrobial treatment was changed according to the results of BCID2 Panel, it was recorded and re-grouped as targeted antimicrobial therapy, de-escalation of the antimicrobial treatment and shifting to another antimicrobial drug if any antimicrobial resistance was detected. Seven-days and thirty-days mortality rate was recorded. Thirty-two patients with 36 septic episodes with positive BCID2 Panel results were included. The median age was 10 months 15 days (ranging from 15 days to 16.5 years). The mean difference between having positive results by the BCID2 Panel and conventional culture methods was 82.2 ± 45.4 h (ranging from 12.3 to 207 h). Effect of the BCID2 Panel on the antimicrobial treatment was detected in 69.4% of the episodes (n = 25). Glycopeptides were ceased at 6 patients, piperacillin/tazobactam was ceased at 6 patients, and cefotaxime was ceased at one patient and de-escalation was achieved in 13 episodes which formed the 36.1% of the initial antimicrobial treatment.   Conclusion: The BCID2 Panel had an important impact on the patients care and optimization according to the principles of antimicrobial stewardship. The BCID2 Panel may be one of the key items for rapid and accurate diagnosis in children with sepsis. Blood culture is still the mainstay for especially detection of antimicrobial drug resistance, while BCID2 tests had several advantages such as speed and diagnostic accuracy as good as blood culture. What is Known: • The BioFire® Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) Panel (bioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France) is a well-validated assay that allows for the simultaneous identification of 43 nucleic acid targets associated with bloodstream infections within about 1 h. What is New: • BCID2 Panel had a direct impact on the patient's treatment decision at the 69.4% of the sepsis episodes. • The clinicians received the microbiological results 82.2 h earlier with BCID2 panel compared to blood culture methods with antimicrobial resistance and de-escalation of the antimicrobial drugs was achieved at 13 episodes which formed the 36.1% of the initial treatment.

Epidemiology and Outcomes of Non-albicans Candida Bloodstream Infections in Transplant Recipients and Cancer Patients

We performed a retrospective survey of non-Candida albicans candidemia in patients with cancer, including those with solid tumors and those with hematological malignancies as well as transplants patients both, solid-organ transplant recipients and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. The study was performed at two healthcare centers in New York City and covered the years 2018-2022. A total of 292 patients (318 isolates) were included in the study. In order of frequency, C. glabrata (38%) was the most common species recovered, followed by C. parapsilosis (19.2%), C. tropicalis (12.6%), C. krusei (10.7%), C. lusitaniae (5.7%), and C. guilliermondii (4.4%). Micafungin was the most common antifungal treatment and 18.5% of patients were on antifungal prophylaxis. The 30-day crude mortality was 40%. 4.5% of patients had more than one non-albicans species detected. In conclusion, this study represents one of the largest surveys of non-albicans species in cancer and transplant patients and provides data on the current epidemiology of these Candida species in this patient population.

Comparison of 3 diagnostic platforms for identification of bacteria and yeast from positive blood culture bottles

Managing bloodstream infections requires fast and accurate diagnostics. Culture-based diagnostic methods for identification from positive blood culture require 24-hour subculture, potentially delaying time to appropriate therapy. Positive blood cultures were collected (n = 301) from September 2021 to August 2022 at the University of Maryland Medical Center. Platforms compared were BioFire® BCID2, Sepsityper®, and short-term culture. For monomicrobial cultures, FilmArray® BCID2 identified 88.3% (241/273) of pathogens. Rapid Sepsityper® identified 76.9% (210/273) of pathogens. Sepsityper® extraction identified 82.4% (225/273) of pathogens. Short-term culture identified 83.5% (228/273) of pathogens. For polymicrobial cultures, Sepsityper®, short-term culture, and BioFire® BCID2 had complete identifications at 10.7% (3/28), 0%, and 92.9% (26/28), respectively. Time-to-results for Rapid Sepsityper®, Sepsityper® extraction, BioFire® BCID2, and Short-term culture were 35, 52, 65, and 306 minutes, respectively. Performance of these platforms can reduce time-to-results and may help effectively treat bloodstream infections faster. Accuracy, time-to-result, and hands-on time are important factors when evaluation diagnostic platforms.

From bottle to bedside: Implementation considerations and antimicrobial stewardship considerations for bloodstream infection rapid diagnostic testing

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) programs have been quick to adopt novel molecular rapid diagnostic technologies (mRDTs) for bloodstream infections (BSIs) to improve antimicrobial management. As such, most of the literature demonstrating the clinical and economic benefits of mRDTs for BSI is in the presence of active AMS intervention. Leveraging mRDTs to improve antimicrobial therapy for BSI is increasingly integral to AMS program activities. This narrative review discusses available and future mRDTs, the relationship between the clinical microbiology laboratory and AMS programs, and practical considerations for optimizing the use of these tools within a health system. Antimicrobial stewardship programs must work closely with their clinical microbiology laboratories to ensure that mRDTs are used to their fullest benefit while remaining cognizant of their limitations. As more mRDT instruments and panels become available and AMS programs continue to expand, future efforts must consider the expansion beyond traditional settings of large academic medical centers and how combinations of tools can further improve patient care.

Microbiological Assessment of the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel: Potential Impact in Critically Ill Patients

Rapid pathogen detection and characterization from positive blood cultures are crucial in the management of patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) and in achieving their improved outcomes. In this context, the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification (BCID2) panel is an FDA approved molecular test, which can quickly identify different species and resistance determinants, thus making an impact in antimicrobial practice. In this study, we analyzed 136 positive blood cultures collected from septic critically ill patients from April 2021 to March 2023 by using the FilmArray BCID2 panel, and results obtained by fast molecular analysis were compared to those obtained by routine protocols. Overall, the BCID2 panel showed a strong concordance with conventional methods, particularly in the case of monomicrobial samples, whereas some discrepancies were found in 10/32 polymicrobial samples. Of note, this technique allowed us to identify a significant number of yeasts (37/94 samples) and to unravel the presence of several resistance markers, including both Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms. These findings strongly support the potential use of the BCID2 panel as an adjunct to the conventional microbiology methods for the management of critically ill septic patients, thus accelerating blood pathogen and resistance genes identification, focusing antibiotic therapy, and avoiding inappropriate and excessive use of drugs.

Clinical Impact of the BIOFIRE Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel in Adult Patients with Bloodstream Infection: A Multicentre Observational Study in the United Arab Emirates

Rapid pathogen identification is key to the proper management of patients with bloodstream infections (BSIs), especially in the intensive care setting. This multicentre study compared the time to pathogen identification results in 185 patients admitted to intensive care with a confirmed BSI, using conventional methods (n = 99 patients) and upon implementation of the BIOFIRE^® Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) Panel, a rapid molecular test allowing for the simultaneous identification of 43 BSI-related nucleic acids targets (n = 86 patients). The median time to result informing optimal antibiotic therapy was significantly shorter following the implementation of the BCID2 Panel (92 vs. 28 h pre vs. post BCID2 implementation; p < 0.0001). BCID2 usage in addition to conventional methods led to the identification of at least one pathogen in 98.8% patients vs. 87.9% using conventional methods alone (p = 0.003) and was associated with a lower 30-day mortality (17.3% vs. 31.6%, respectively; p = 0.019). This study at three intensive care units in the United Arab Emirates therefore demonstrates that, in addition to conventional microbiological methods and an effective antimicrobial stewardship program, the BCID2 Panel could improve the clinical outcome of patients admitted to the intensive care unit with a confirmed BSI.

Influence of Multiplex PCR in the Management of Antibiotic Treatment in Patients with Bacteremia

The multiplex PCR assay can be a helpful diagnostic tool for patients with bacteremia. Herein, we assessed the impact of a Blood Culture Identification Panel (BCID) on both the diagnosis and treatment of patients with bacteremia. We performed a retrospective study using laboratory and clinical data to evaluate the impact of syndromic testing using a multiplex PCR testing system (BioFire® FilmArray) for the management of patients with bloodstream infections. BCID detected the pathogen in 102 (87.9%) samples out of the 116 positive blood cultures tested. The average time from the blood culture collection to the communication of the molecular test result was 23.93 h (range: 10.67-69.27 h). The main pathogen detected was Klebsiella pneumoniae (17.6%). The antimicrobial therapy was changed in accordance with the BCID results in 28 (40.6%) out of the 69 cases, wherein the treatment could have been theoretically adjusted. This allowed the adjustment of the therapy to be performed 1305.1 h faster than it would have been possible if conventional diagnostic methods had been used; this was the case for only 35.1% of the time gained if treatment was adjusted for all patients with positive BCID. Thus, although molecular tests can make a difference in the management of bloodstream infections, there is room for improvement in the clinical application of BCID results.

Optimization of Empirical Antimicrobial Therapy in Enterobacterales Bloodstream Infection Using the Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase Prediction Score

Clinical tools for the prediction of antimicrobial resistance have been derived and validated without examination of their implementation in clinical practice. This study examined the impact of utilization of the extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) prediction score on the time to initiation of appropriate antimicrobial therapy for bloodstream infection (BSI). The quasi-experimental cohort study included hospitalized adults with BSI due to ceftriaxone-resistant (CRO-R) Enterobacterales at three community hospitals in Columbia, South Carolina, USA before (January 2010 to December 2013) and after (January 2014 to December 2019) implementation of an antimicrobial stewardship intervention. In total, 45 and 101 patients with BSI due to CRO-R Enterobacterales were included before and after the intervention, respectively. Overall, the median age was 66 years, 85 (58%) were men, and 86 (59%) had a urinary source of infection. The mean time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy was 78 h before and 46 h after implementation of the antimicrobial stewardship intervention (p = 0.04). Application of the ESBL prediction score as part of an antimicrobial stewardship intervention was associated with a significant reduction in time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy in patients with BSI due to CRO-R Enterobacterales. Utilization of advanced rapid diagnostics may be necessary for a further reduction in time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy in this population.

Updates in Molecular Diagnostics in Solid Organ Transplantation Recipients

Advances in molecular diagnostics have the potential to improve patient care among solid organ transplant recipients by reducing time to pathogen identification and informing directed therapy. Although cultures remain the cornerstone of traditional microbiology, advanced molecular diagnostics, such as metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), may increase detection of pathogens. This is particularly true in the settings of prior antibiotic exposure, and when causative organisms are fastidious. mNGS also offers a hypothesis-free diagnostic method of testing. This is useful in situations whereby the differential is broad or when the infectious agent is unlikely to be detected by routine methods.

Point-of-Care Testing for the Diagnosis of Fungal Infections

Invasive fungal infections are increasing worldwide due to factors such as climate change and immunomodulating therapies. Unfortunately, the detection of these infections is limited due to the low sensitivity and long periods required for laboratory testing. Point-of-care testing could lead to more rapid diagnosis of these often devasting infections. However, there are currently no true point-of-care tests on the market for the detection of fungi. In this article, the current state of fungal antigen and molecular testing is reviewed, with commentary on the potential for development and use in the point-of-care setting.

Optimizing Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infections Following Rapid Molecular Diagnostic Testing and an Antimicrobial Stewardship Program Intervention

Pending antibiotic susceptibility results, vancomycin is often used for bloodstream infections (BSIs) to ensure treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). As rapid discrimination of methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) from MRSA in BSIs could decrease vancomycin use and allow early optimization of beta-lactam therapy, this study evaluated the impact of the use of rapid molecular testing for MSSA and MRSA coupled with an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) intervention. Between January and July 2020, the Cepheid Xpert MRSA/SA blood culture assay was performed on blood cultures with Gram-positive cocci in clusters that were identified as S. aureus using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS). The ASP team member then consulted with the treating physician. The time to optimal therapy (TTOT) and clinical outcomes, including length of hospital stay (LOS), were compared between the intervention (n = 29) and historical (n = 27) cohorts. TTOT was defined as the time from the first blood culture draw to the use of appropriately dosed antistaphylococcal beta-lactam monotherapy without vancomycin. Molecular testing significantly reduced the median time to MSSA and MRSA discrimination to 7.8 h, compared to 24.3 h with culture-based methods (P < 0.001). Compared to the control group, the median TTOT in the ASP intervention group was significantly shorter (P = 0.041) at 38.0 h (versus 50.1 h). Rapid discrimination between MRSA and MSSA using molecular testing, paired with an ASP intervention, significantly reduced the TTOT in patients with MSSA BSIs. IMPORTANCE Our research shows that time to optimal antibiotic treatment for serious bloodstream infections can be improved with rapid molecular sensitivity testing and feedback to prescribers. This can be implemented in laboratories without full microbiology services or training to improve patient outcomes by improving antimicrobial use.

Multicenter Evaluation of the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel for Pathogen Detection in Bloodstream Infections

The FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 panel (BCID2; bioMérieux) is a fully automated PCR-based assay for identifying bacteria, fungi, and bacterial resistance markers in positive blood cultures (BC) in about 1 h. In this multicenter study, we evaluated the performance of the BCID2 panel for pathogen detection in positive BC. Conventional culture and BCID2 were performed in parallel at four tertiary-care hospitals. We included 152 positive BC-130 monomicrobial and 22 polymicrobial cultures-in this analysis. The BCID2 assay correctly identified 90% (88/98) of Gram-negative and 89% (70/79) of Gram-positive bacteria. Five bacterial isolates targeted by the BCID2 panel and recovered from five positive BC, including three polymicrobial cultures, were missed by the BCID2 assay. Fifteen isolates were off-panel organisms, accounting for 8% (15/182) of the isolates obtained from BC. The mean positive percent agreement between the BCID2 assay and standard culture was 97% (95% confidence interval, 95 to 99%), with agreement ranging from 67% for Candida albicans to 100% for 17 targets included in the BCID2 panel. BCID2 also identified the blaCTX-M gene in seven BC, including one for which no extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing isolate was obtained in culture. However, it failed to detect ESBL-encoding genes in three BC. Two of the 18 mecA/C genes detected by the BCID2 were not confirmed. No carbapenemase, mecA/C, or MREJ targets were detected. The median turnaround time was significantly shorter for BCID2 than for culture. The BCID2 panel may facilitate faster pathogen identification in bloodstream infections. IMPORTANCE Rapid molecular diagnosis combining the identification of pathogens and the detection of antibiotic resistance genes from positive blood cultures (BC) can improve the outcome for patients with bloodstream infections. The FilmArray BCID2 panel, an updated version of the original BCID, can detect 11 Gram-positive bacteria, 15 Gram-negative bacteria, 7 fungal pathogens, and 10 antimicrobial resistance genes directly from a positive BC. Here, we evaluated the real-life microbiological performance of the BCID2 assay in comparison to the results of standard methods used in routine practice at four tertiary care hospitals.

BIOFIRE® Blood Culture IDentification 2 (BCID2) panel for early adaptation of antimicrobial therapy in adult patients with bloodstream infections: a real-life experience

Our objective was to assess the effectiveness of a multiplex PCR panel for blood culture identification (BCID2) on the implementation of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. We conducted a monocentric pre/post study comparing the time to result from direct microscopic examination (DE) to bacterial identification (BI) in positive blood cultures between 2 different periods: P1 without BCID2 and P2 with BCID2. Appropriate treatments prescribed before DE and after DE / BCID2 and after BI / BCID2 were compared using direct proportion comparison and survival analysis. For mono-microbial bloodstream infections, the proportion of appropriate antimicrobial treatment after DE was 50% in P1 vs. 87.5% after BCID2 in P2 (P < 0.001) for Gram-negative bacteria and 33.0% in P1 vs. 64.4% in P2 (P < 0.01) for Gram-positive bacteria. A significant difference (P = 0.04) was recorded with survival curves for Gram positive bacteria. BCID2 seems effective in reducing the time for prescribing appropriate antimicrobials.

How to Identify Invasive Candidemia in ICU-A Narrative Review

The incidence of invasive fungal infection in ICUs has increased over time, and Candida spp. is the most common cause. Critical care patients are a particular set of patients with a higher risk of invasive fungal infections; this population is characterized by extensive use of medical devices such as central venous lines, arterial lines, bladder catheters, hemodialysis and mechanical intubation. Blood cultures are the gold standard diagnosis; still, they are not an early diagnostic technique. Mannan, anti-mannan antibody, 1,3-β-D-glucan, Candida albicans germ tube antibody, Vitek 2, PNA-FISH, MALDI-TOF, PCR and T2Candida panel are diagnostic promising microbiological assays. Scoring systems are tools to distinguish patients with low and high risk of infection. They can be combined with diagnostic tests to select patients for pre-emptive treatment or antifungal discontinuation. Candidemia is the focus of this narrative review, an approach to contributing factors and diagnosis, with an emphasis on critical care patients.

Early appropriate diagnostics and treatment of MDR Gram-negative infections

The term difficult-to-treat resistance has been recently coined to identify Gram-negative bacteria exhibiting resistance to all fluoroquinolones and all β-lactam categories, including carbapenems. Such bacteria are posing serious challenges to clinicians trying to identify the best therapeutic option for any given patient. Delayed appropriate therapy has been associated with worse outcomes including increase in length of stay, increase in total in-hospital costs and ∼20% increase in the risk of in-hospital mortality. In addition, time to appropriate antibiotic therapy has been shown to be an independent predictor of 30 day mortality in patients with resistant organisms. Improving and anticipating aetiological diagnosis through optimizing not only the identification of phenotypic resistance to antibiotic classes/agents, but also the identification of specific resistance mechanisms, would have a major impact on reducing the frequency and duration of inappropriate early antibiotic therapy. In light of these considerations, the present paper reviews the increasing need for rapid diagnosis of bacterial infections and efficient laboratory workflows to confirm diagnoses and facilitate prompt de-escalation to targeted therapy, in line with antimicrobial stewardship principles. Rapid diagnostic tests currently available and future perspectives for their use are discussed. Early appropriate diagnostics and treatment of MDR Gram-negative infections require a multidisciplinary approach that includes multiple different diagnostic methods and further consensus of algorithms, protocols and guidelines to select the optimal antibiotic therapy.

Performance of the BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 panel for the diagnosis of bloodstream infections

Background

Conventional blood cultures methods are associated with long turnaround times, preventing early treatment optimization in bloodstream infections. The BioFire Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) Panel is a new multiplex PCR applied on positive blood cultures, reducing time to pathogen identification and resistant markers detection.

Methods

We conducted a prospective observational study including positive blood cultures from Intensive Care Units and Emergency Departments and performed BCID2 in addition to conventional testing. Concordance between the two methods was assessed and BCID2 performance characteristics were evaluated. Resistance markers detected by BCID2 were confirmed by in-house PCR. Whole genome sequencing was performed in discordant cases.

Results

Among 60 monomicrobial blood cultures, BCID2 correctly identified 55/56 (91.7%) on-panel pathogens, showing an overall concordance of 98%. In 4/60 cases BCID2 did not detect any target and these all grew BCID2 off-panel bacteria. Only one discordant case was found. Sensitivity and specificity for Gram-positive bacteria on monomicrobial samples were 100% (95% CI 85.8-100%) and 100% (95% CI 90.3-100%) respectively, while for Gram-negatives 100% (95% CI 87.7-100) and 96.9% (95% CI 83.8-99.9%), respectively. Among two polymicrobial blood cultures, full concordance was observed in one case only. BCID2 identified antimicrobial resistance genes in 6/62 samples, all confirmed by in-house PCR (3 mecA/C S. epidermidis, 3 bla _CTX-M E. coli). Estimated time to results gained using BCID2 as compared to conventional testing was 9.69 h (95% CI: 7.85-11.53).

Conclusions

BCID2 showed good agreement with conventional methods. Studies to assess its clinical impact are warranted.

Candida parapsilosis bloodstream infection in an immunocompromised host with discordant multiplex polymerase chain reaction and conventional blood culture results: a case report

Prompt treatment of candidemia, especially in immunocompromised hosts, is known to improve outcomes. We present a case of discordance among results of Gram stain, multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based rapid diagnostic technology, and conventional cultures that subsequently resulted in delayed therapy and hospitalization. An immunocompromised patient presented to the outpatient oncology clinic with signs and symptoms of systemic infection. Blood cultures were obtained, and Gram stain showed gram-negative rods, while multiplex PCR results (BioFire® FilmArray® BCID 1) returned positive for both Enterobacter cloacae and Candida parapsilosis. Conventional cultures only grew E. cloacae. Because of the discordant results, the primary team elected to give ertapenem monotherapy and defer antifungal therapy. The patient’s symptoms progressed, and 11 days later, the patient was admitted with subsequent positive blood cultures for C. parapsilosis. The patient required a 9-day hospitalization due to complications associated with candidemia. This case highlights the value of understanding and interpretation of rapid diagnostics, shared decision-making in antimicrobial management of high-risk patients, and the important responsibility of antimicrobial stewardship teams across the continuum of care.