Improved blood culture identification by FilmArray in cultures from regional hospitals compared with teaching hospital cultures

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.

Development, deployment and in-field demonstration of mobile coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 Nucleic acid amplification test

Introduction. The evolving SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic presents a series of challenges to clinical diagnostic services. Many proprietary PCR platforms deployed outside centralised laboratories have limited capacity to upscale when public health demands increase. We set out to develop and validate an open-platform mobile laboratory for remote area COVID-19 diagnosis, with a subsequent field trial.Gap Statement. In regional Western Australia, molecular diagnostic support is limited to near point-of-care devices. We therefore aimed to demonstrate open-platform capability in a rapidly deployable format within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.Methodology. We compared, selected and validated components of a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR assay in order to establish a portable molecular diagnostics laboratory. The optimal combination of PCR assay equipment, reagents and consumables required for operation to national standards in regional laboratories was identified. This comprised RNA extraction and purification (QuickGene-480, Kurabo, Japan), a duplex RT-PCR assay (Logix Smart COVID-19, Co-Diagnostics, USA), a Myra liquid handling robot (Biomolecular Systems, Australia) and a magnetic induction thermal cycler (MIC, Biomolecular Systems).Results The 95 and 99% limits of detection were 1.01 copies μl-1 (5.05 copies per reaction) and 2.80 copies μl-1 (14.00 copies per reaction) respectively. The Co-Diagnostics assay amplified both SARS-CoV-1 and -2 RNA but showed no other cross reactivity. Qualitative results aligned with the reference laboratory SARS-CoV-2 assay (sensitivity 100% [95 % CI 96.48-100%], specificity 100% [95% CI 96.52-100%]). In field trials, the laboratory was operational within an hour of arrival on-site, can process up to 36 samples simultaneously, produces results in two and a half hours from specimen reception, and performed well during six consecutive runs during a 1 week deployment.Conclusion. Our mobile laboratory enables an adaptive response to increased test demand, and unlike many proprietary point-of-care PCR systems, rapid substitution with an alternative assay if gene targets change or reagent supply chains fail. We envisage operation of this RT-PCR assay as a standby capability to meet varying regional test demands under public health emergency operations guidance.

Rapid Methods for Detection of MRSA in Clinical Specimens

Traditional antimicrobial susceptibility test methods for detection of S. aureus resistant to oxacillin (MRSA) such as disk diffusion, broth microdilution, and oxacillin screen plate require 18-24 h of incubation after having the organism growing in pure culture. Rapid and accurate identification of MRSA isolates is essential not only for patient care, but also for effective infection control programs to limit the spread of MRSA. In the last few years, several commercial rapid tests for detection of MRSA directly from nasal and wound swabs, as well as from positive blood cultures, have been developed for use in clinical laboratories. Chromogenic agar plates and real-time PCR and other molecular tests are gaining popularity as MRSA screening tests because they have the advantage of a lower turnaround time than that of traditional culture and susceptibility testing and they are capable of detecting MRSA directly from nasal and wound swabs, allowing rapid identification of colonized or infected patients. In addition, molecular methods able to detect and differentiate S. aureus and MRSA (SA/MRSA) directly from blood cultures are becoming a useful tool for rapid detection of bacteremia caused by MSSA and MRSA. This review focuses on the procedures for performing testing using rapid methods currently available for detection of MRSA directly from clinical specimens.

Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility tests for sepsis; the road ahead

Current methods for antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) are too slow to affect initial treatment decisions in the early stages of sepsis, when the prescriber is most concerned to select effective therapy immediately, rather than finding out what will not work 1 or 2 days later. There is a clear need for much faster differentiation between viral and bacterial infection, and AST, linked to earlier aetiological diagnosis, without sacrificing either the accuracy of quantitative AST or the low cost of qualitative AST. Truly rapid AST methods are eagerly awaited, and there are several candidate technologies that aim to improve the targeting of our limited stock of effective antimicrobial agents. However, none of these technologies are approaching the point of care and nor can they be described as truly culture-independent diagnostic tests. Rapid chemical and genomic methods of resistance detection are not yet reliable predictors of antimicrobial susceptibility and often rely on prior bacterial isolation. In order to resolve the trade-off between diagnostic confidence and therapeutic efficacy in increasingly antimicrobial-resistant sepsis, we propose a series of three linked decision milestones: initial clinical assessment (e.g. qSOFA score) within 10 min, initial laboratory tests and presumptive antimicrobial therapy within 1 h, and definitive AST with corresponding antimicrobial amendment within an 8 h window (i.e. the same working day). Truly rapid AST methods therefore must be integrated into the clinical laboratory workflow to ensure maximum impact on clinical outcomes of sepsis, and diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship. The requisite series of development stages come with a substantial regulatory burden that hinders the translation of innovation into practice. The regulatory hurdles for the adoption of rapid AST technology emphasize technical accuracy, but progress will also rely on the effect rapid AST has on prescribing behaviour by physicians managing the care of patients with sepsis. Early adopters in well-equipped teaching centres in close proximity to large clinical laboratories are likely to be early beneficiaries of rapid AST, while simplified and lower-cost technology is needed to support poorly resourced hospitals in developing countries, with their higher burden of AMR. If we really want the clinical laboratory to deliver a specific, same-day diagnosis underpinned by definitive AST results, we are going to have to advocate more effectively for the clinical benefits of bacterial detection and susceptibility testing at critical decision points in the sepsis management pathway.

Implementation and optimization of molecular rapid diagnostic tests for bloodstream infections

PURPOSE

The implementation and optimization of molecular rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) as an antimicrobial stewardship intervention for patients with bloodstream infections (BSIs) are reviewed.

SUMMARY

All U.S. acute care hospitals accredited by the Joint Commission are required to implement an antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP). Of the many interventions available to ASPs, mRDTs have demonstrated consistent, meaningful results on antimicrobial optimization and patient outcomes. Even among infectious diseases and antimicrobial stewardship-trained pharmacists, significant knowledge and familiarity gaps exist regarding available mRDTs and how best to implement and optimize them. Given the paucity of infectious diseases and/or antimicrobial stewardship-trained pharmacists, the mandates for establishing ASPs will require non-infectious diseases/antimicrobial stewardship-trained pharmacists to implement stewardship interventions, which may include mRDTs, within their institution. Optimization of mRDTs requires adequate diagnostic stewardship, specifically evaluating how mRDT implementation may decrease costs and assist in meeting antimicrobial stewardship regulatory requirements. Knowledge of how these technologies will augment existing microbiology and antimicrobial stewardship workflow is essential. Finally, selecting the right mRDT necessitates familiarity with the instrument's capabilities and with the institutional antibiogram.

CONCLUSION

mRDTs have demonstrated the ability to be one of the most powerful antimicrobial stewardship interventions. Pharmacists required to implement an ASP in their institution should consider mRDTs as standard of care for patients with BSIs.

Field trials of blood culture identification FilmArray in regional Australian hospitals

Purpose. In this field trial of rapid blood culture identification (BCID), we aimed to determine whether the improved speed and accuracy of specific BCID predicted in our earlier pilot study could be obtained in regional hospitals by deploying a multiplex PCR FilmArray (Biomerieux, France) capability in their laboratories.Methods. We trained local hospital laboratory staff to operate the FilmArray equipment and act on the results. To do this, we integrated the multiplex PCR into the standard laboratory blood culture workflow and reporting procedure.Results. Of 100 positive blood culture episodes, BCID FilmArray results were correct in all 42 significant monobacterial cultures, with a fully predictive identity in 38 (90.5 %) and a partial identity in another four (9.5 %). There was one major error; a false positive Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The minor errors were the detection of one methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, which proved to be a methicillin-sensitive S. aureus mixed with a methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococcus, five false negative coagulase-negative staphylococci and one false negative streptococcus species. We found that 41/49 (84 %) clinically significant mono- and polymicrobial culture results were fully predictive of culture-based identification to bacterial species level at a mean of 1.15 days after specimen collection.Conclusions. There was a reduction of 1.21 days in the time taken to produce a definitive BCID compared to the previous year, translating into earlier communication of more specific blood culture results to the treating physician. Reduced time to definitive blood culture results has a direct benefit for isolated Australian communities at great distances from specialist hospital services.

Rapid Detection of Bloodstream Pathogens in Oncologic Patients with a FilmArray Multiplex PCR Assay: a Comparison with Culture Methods

The results of the FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification Panel (BCID) (BioFire Diagnostics) and the culture with susceptibility testing of 70 positive blood cultures from oncologic patients were compared. The multiplex PCR assay (BCID) identified 81 of the 83 isolates (97.6%), covered by the panel. The panel produced results in significantly shorter time than standard identification methods, when counted from receiving positive blood cultures bottles to the final results. It is an accurate method for the rapid identification of pathogens and resistance genes from blood culture in oncologic patients.