Search

Objectives: The utility of follow-up blood cultures (FUBCs) in patients with Gram-negative bloodstream infection (GN-BSI) is controversial. Observational studies have suggested significant mortality benefit but may be limited by single-centre designs, immortal time bias, and residual confounding. We examined the impact of FUBCs on mortality in patients with GN-BSI in a retrospective population-wide cohort study in Ontario, Canada., Methods: Adult patients with GN-BSI hospitalized between April 2017 and December 2021 were included. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days. FUBC was treated as a time-varying exposure. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mortality, length of stay, and number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 and 90 days., Results: Thirty-four thousand one hundred patients were included; 8807 (25.8%) patients received FUBC, of which 966 (11.0%) were positive. Median proportion of patients receiving FUBC was 18.8% (interquartile range, 10.0-29.7%; range, 0-66.1%) across 101 hospitals; this correlated with positivity and contamination rate. Eight hundred ninety (10.1%) patients in the FUBC group and 2263 (8.9%) patients in the no FUBC group died within 30 days. In the fully adjusted model, there was no association between FUBC and mortality (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.04). Patients with FUBC had significantly longer length of stay (median, 11 vs. 7 days; adjusted risk ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.16-1.21) and fewer number of days alive and out of hospital at 30 and 90 days., Discussion: FUBC collection in patients with GN-BSI varies widely across hospitals and may be associated with prolonged hospitalization without clear survival benefit. Residual confounding may be present given the observational design. Clear benefit should be demonstrated in a randomized trial before widespread adoption of routine FUBC., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Diagnostic error in the use of respiratory cultures for ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) fuels misdiagnosis and antibiotic overuse within intensive care units. In this prospective quasi-experimental study (NCT05176353), we aimed to evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of a novel VAP-specific bundled diagnostic stewardship intervention (VAP-DSI) to mitigate VAP over-diagnosis/overtreatment., Methods: We developed and implemented a VAP-DSI using an interruptive clinical decision support tool and modifications to clinical laboratory workflows. Interventions included gatekeeping access to respiratory culture ordering, preferential use of non-bronchoscopic bronchoalveolar lavage for culture collection, and suppression of culture results for samples with minimal alveolar neutrophilia. Rates of adverse safety outcomes, positive respiratory cultures, and antimicrobial utilization were compared between mechanically ventilated patients (MVPs) in the 1-year post-intervention study cohort (2022-2023) and 5-year pre-intervention MVP controls (2017-2022)., Results: VAP-DSI implementation did not associate with increases in adverse safety outcomes but did associate with a 20% rate reduction in positive respiratory cultures per 1000 MVP days (pre-intervention rate 127 [95% CI: 122-131], post-intervention rate 102 [95% CI: 92-112], p < 0.01). Significant reductions in broad-spectrum antibiotic days of therapy per 1000 MVP days were noted after VAP-DSI implementation (pre-intervention rate 1199 [95% CI: 1177-1205], post-intervention rate 1149 [95% CI: 1116-1184], p 0.03)., Discussion: Implementation of a VAP-DSI was safe and associated with significant reductions in rates of positive respiratory cultures and broad-spectrum antimicrobial use. This innovative trial of a VAP-DSI represents a novel avenue for intensive care unit antimicrobial stewardship. Multicentre trials of VAP-DSIs are warranted., (Copyright © 2023 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the clinical significance of Dientamoeba fragilis (DF) and Blastocystis species (Bs) in human stool., Methods: Observational study of patients ≥18 years, who were tested by stool multiplex PCR for bacteria and parasites between April 2019 and March 2022. Although DF and Bs are part of the PCR kit, these results are not routinely reported to the patient or the ordering physician. The main outcomes were the incidence of symptoms during 14 days before the referral to stool PCR test, and the incidence of several clinical outcomes during 60 days after the PCR test (symptoms, referrals to further evaluation, prescription of symptomatic, or antibiotic treatment)., Results: A total of 27 918 patients were tested by stool PCR during the 3 study years. A total of 6215 (22.3%) and 5337 (19.2%) were positive for DF and Bs, respectively. The incidence of symptoms before the test was similar in those positive for Bs or DF and those with all-negative PCR (adjusted OR and 95% CI of 0.87 [0.80-0.95] and 0.82 [0.76-0.88] for Bs and DF, respectively), whereas significantly higher (2.47 [2.23-2.73]) in those positive for the other multiplex PCR assay components. During the 60 days after the test, the prevalence of any of the outcomes was similar in those positive for Bs or DF and those with negative PCR (adjusted OR and 95% CI of 0.92 [0.83-1.02] and 0.89 [0.81-0.97] for symptoms, 0.84 [0.75-0.94] and 0.93 [0.85-1.01] for referrals, 0.88 [0.75-1.03] and 0.82 [0.71-0.94] for symptomatic treatment, and 0.88 [0.75-1.02] and 0.86 [0.75-0.98] for antibiotic treatment in the Bs and DF positive individuals, respectively). The PCR cycle threshold was not associated with any of the outcomes., Discussion: Positive stool PCR for DF or Bs was not associated with any of the measured clinical outcomes., (Copyright © 2023 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The clinical features and predictors of Clostridioides difficile infection overlap with many conditions., Objectives: We performed a systematic review to evaluate the diagnostic utility of clinical features (clinical examination, risk factors, laboratory tests, and radiographic findings) associated with C. difficile., Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic features for C. difficile., Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane databases were searched up to September 2021., Study Eligibility Criteria: Studies that reported clinical features of C. difficile, a valid reference standard test for confirming diagnosis of C. difficile, and a comparison among patients with a positive and negative test result., Participants: Adult and paediatric patients across diverse clinical settings., Outcomes: Sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios., Reference Standard: Stool nucleic acid amplification tests, enzyme immunoassays, cell cytotoxicity assay, and stool toxigenic culture., Assessment of Risk of Bias: Rational Clinical Examination Series and Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2., Methods of Data Synthesis: Univariate and bivariate analyses., Results: We screened 11 231 articles of which 40 were included, enabling the evaluation of 66 features for their diagnostic utility for C. difficile (10 clinical examination findings, 4 laboratory tests, 10 radiographic findings, prior exposure to 13 antibiotic types, and 29 clinical risk factors). Of the ten features identified on clinical examination, none were significantly clinically associated with increased likelihood of C. difficile infection. Some features that increased likelihood of C. difficile infection were stool leukocytes (LR+ 5.31, 95% CI 3.29-8.56) and hospital admission in the prior 3 months (LR+ 2.14, 95% CI 1.48-3.11). Several radiographic findings also strongly increased the likelihood of C. difficile infection like ascites (LR+ 2.91, 95% CI 1.89-4.49)., Discussion: There is limited utility of bedside clinical examination alone in detecting C. difficile infection. Accurate diagnosis of C. difficile infection requires thoughtful clinical assessment for interpretation of microbiologic testing in all suspected cases., (Copyright © 2023 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) can be challenging due to high colonization rates. Unlike PCR-only testing, two-step algorithm testing (that includes toxin and PCR) may help differentiate colonization from active infection, but it is unknown if this type of testing impacts treatment decisions. We examined the association between changing CDI diagnostic methods, the way the testing results were displayed, and the rates of CDI-specific treatment., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of positive C. difficile cases over 2 years, a year preceding and following our institution's transition from PCR to two-step testing. During the PCR period, results were displayed in the electronic medical record as 'positive'. In the two-step period, positive results were either displayed as 'likely colonized' or 'toxin positive'. Rates of CDI-specific therapy and adverse patient outcomes (30-day mortality and intensive care unit admission) were compared among the three groups., Results: A total of 610 patients had positive results over the study period. Of the 354 patients in the PCR group, 329 (93%) were treated with CDI-specific therapy. Of the 142 patients in the likely colonized group, 59 (42%) were treated. All 114 patients in the toxin-positive group were treated. Multivariate analysis of patients who were PCR positive or likely colonized showed that tests sent in the two-step era were less likely to be associated with treatment for CDI (odds ratio 0.05, 95% CI 0.03-0.09)., Discussion: We found a correlation between changing the type of test and the way the results were displayed and reduction in CDI-specific antibiotic use without restricting clinician diagnostic ordering., (Copyright © 2023 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bloodstream infections are a major cause of death with increasing incidence and severity. Blood cultures are still the reference standard for microbiological diagnosis, but are rather slow. Molecular methods can be used as add-on complementary assays. They can be useful to speed up microbial identification and to predict antimicrobial susceptibility, applied to direct blood samples or positive blood cultures., Aim: To review recent developments in molecular-based diagnostic platforms used for the identification of bloodstream infections, with a focus on assays performed directly on blood samples and positive blood cultures., Sources: Peer reviewed articles, conference abstracts, and manufacturers' websites., Content: We give an update on recent developments of molecular methods in diagnosing BSIs. We first describe the currently available molecular methods to be used for positive blood cultures including: a) in situ hybridization-based methods; b) DNA-microarray-based hybridization technology; c) nucleic acid amplification-based methods; and d) combined methods. Subsequently, molecular methods applied directly to whole blood samples are discussed, including the use of nucleic acid amplification-based methods, T2 magnetic resonance-based methods, and metagenomics for diagnosing BSIs., Implications: Advances in molecular-based methods complementary to conventional blood culture diagnostics and antimicrobial stewardship programmes may optimize infection management by allowing rapid identification of pathogens and relevant antimicrobial resistance genes. Rapid diagnosis of the causing microorganism and relevant resistance determinants is important for early administration and modification of appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Ultimately, this may lead to improved quality and cost-effectiveness of health care, as well as reduced antimicrobial resistance selection., (Copyright © 2018 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Next generation sequencing (NGS) is increasingly being used in clinical microbiology. Like every new technology adopted in microbiology, the integration of NGS into clinical and routine workflows must be carefully managed., Aim: To review the practical aspects of implementing bacterial whole genome sequencing (WGS) in routine diagnostic laboratories., Sources: Review of the literature and expert opinion., Content: In this review, we discuss when and how to integrate whole genome sequencing (WGS) in the routine workflow of the clinical laboratory. In addition, as the microbiology laboratories have to adhere to various national and international regulations and criteria for their accreditation, we deliberate on quality control issues for using WGS in microbiology, including the importance of proficiency testing. Furthermore, the current and future place of this technology in the diagnostic hierarchy of microbiology is described as well as the necessity of maintaining backwards compatibility with already established methods. Finally, we speculate on the question of whether WGS can entirely replace routine microbiology in the future and the tension between the fact that most sequencers are designed to process multiple samples in parallel whereas for optimal diagnosis a one-by-one processing of the samples is preferred. Special reference is made to the cost and turnaround time of WGS in diagnostic laboratories., Implications: Further development is required to improve the workflow for WGS, in particular to shorten the turnaround time, reduce costs, and streamline downstream data analyses. Only when these processes reach maturity will reliance on WGS for routine patient management and infection control management become feasible, enabling the transformation of clinical microbiology into a genome-based and personalized diagnostic field., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)