scholarly journals Evaluation of the Performance of Filmarray Blood Culture Identification Panel on Detecting Blood Cultures Containing Activated Carbon Powder

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chen Chen ◽  
Shang He ◽  
Chengbin Wang
Keyword(s):  
Activated Carbon ◽  
Blood Culture ◽  
Detection System ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Pcr Amplification ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Combination Method ◽  
Carbon Powder ◽  
Identification Rate ◽  
Culture Identification

AbstractObjectiveThe FilmArray Blood Culture Identification (BCID) panel is a rapid microfluidic PCR amplification microbial detection system. Several studies have evaluated its clinical performance on the basis of blood culture bottles containing resins. However, proportion of hospitals in China use bottles with carbon power, which the performance of FilmArray has not been fully investigated. Therefore, this study is conducted to explore the accuracy of the panel using blood culture bottles with carbon power.Method147 venous blood cultures containing carbon powder were used to assess the microbial and antibiotic resistance detection ability of the FilmArray panel. Outcomes were compared with results of the clinical combination method and their consistency was analyzed.ResultsFilmArray detected single microorganism in 121 samples, multiple microorganism in 9 cases and the consistency rate between the two methods was 90.6%. Among the 150 microorganisms detected, 85.1% (40/47) of staphylococcus contained the antibiotic resistant mecA gene, 15.3% (9/59) of Enterobacter detected the KPC gene, 7.7% (1/13) of Enterococcus has the vanA gene and the consistency with their clinical drug-resistant phenotypes were 93.6%, 86.4% and 100%, respectively.ConclusionThe identification rate of the FilmArray BCID panel using venous blood cultures with activated carbon powder was highly consistent with the outcomes of previous researchers using non-carbon powder blood culture bottles. It is capable of providing rapid and reliable results in the detection of pathogens present in automated blood culture systems.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the BioFire® FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification Panel on positive blood cultures in a regional hospital laboratory in KwaZulu-Natal

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mokshanand Fhooblall ◽  
Fikile Nkwanyana ◽  
Koleka P. Mlisana
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
Antimicrobial Susceptibility ◽  
Reference Method ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Combination Methods ◽  
Single Organism ◽  
Hospitalised Patients ◽  
Short Run ◽  
Culture Identification ◽  
Study Laboratory

Background: There are presently many non-culture-based methods commercially available to identify organisms and antimicrobial susceptibility from blood culture bottles. Each platform has its benefits and limitations. However, there is a need for an improved system with minimal hands-on requirements and short run times.Objectives: In this study, the performance characteristics of the FilmArray® BCID Panel kit were evaluated to assess the efficiency of the kit against an existing system used for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility of organisms from blood cultures.Methods: Positive blood cultures that had initially been received from hospitalised patients of a large quaternary referral hospital in Durban, South Africa were processed as per routine protocol at its Medical Microbiology Laboratory. Positive blood cultures were processed on the FilmArray BCID Panel kit in parallel with the routine sample processing. Inferences were then drawn from results obtained.Results: Organism detection by the FilmArray BCID panel was accurate at 92.6% when organisms that were on the repertoire of the kit were considered, compared to the combination methods (reference method used in the study laboratory). Detection of the antimicrobial resistance markers provided by the panel and reference method demonstrated 100% consistency. Blood cultures with a single organism were accurately identified at 93.8% by FilmArray, while blood cultures with more than one organism were identified at 85.7%.Conclusion: The FilmArray BCID Panel kit is valuable for detection of organisms and markers of antibiotic resistance for an extensive range of organisms.

scholarly journals Detection of Neisseria meningitidis from Negative Blood Cultures and Cerebrospinal Fluid with the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification Panel

2014 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 2262-2264 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Pardo ◽  
K. P. Klinker ◽  
S. J. Borgert ◽  
B. M. Butler ◽  
K. H. Rand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cerebrospinal Fluid ◽  
Blood Culture ◽  
Neisseria Meningitidis ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Culture Identification

scholarly journals Antimicrobial Stewardship Opportunities in Patients with Bacteremia Not Identified by BioFire FilmArray

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Ny ◽  
A. Ozaki ◽  
J. Pallares ◽  
P. Nieberg ◽  
A. Wong-Beringer
Keyword(s):  
Intensive Care Unit ◽  
Intensive Care ◽  
Blood Culture ◽  
Intensive Care Unit Admission ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Rapid Diagnostics ◽  
Admission Data ◽  
Culture Identification

ABSTRACTA subset of bacteremia cases are caused by organisms not detected by a rapid-diagnostics platform, BioFire blood culture identification (BCID), with unknown clinical characteristics and outcomes. Patients with ≥1 positive blood culture over a 15-month period were grouped by negative (NB-PC) versus positive (PB-PC) BioFire BCID results and compared with respect to demographics, infection characteristics, antibiotic therapy, and outcomes (length of hospital stay [LOS] and in-hospital mortality). Six percent of 1,044 positive blood cultures were NB-PC. The overall mean age was 65 ± 22 years, 54% of the patients were male, and most were admitted from home; fewer NB-PC had diabetes (19% versus 31%,P= 0.0469), although the intensive care unit admission data were similar. Anaerobes were identified in 57% of the bacteremia cases from the NB-PC group by conventional methods:Bacteroidesspp. (30%),Clostridium(11%), andFusobacteriumspp. (8%). Final identification of the NB-PC pathogen was delayed by 2 days (P< 0.01) versus the PB-PC group. The sources of bacteremia were more frequently unknown for the NB-PC group (32% versus 11%,P< 0.01) and of pelvic origin (5% versus 0.1%,P< 0.01) compared to urine (31% versus 9%,P< 0.01) for the PB-PC patients. Fewer NB-PC patients received effective treatment before (68% versus 84%,P= 0.017) and after BCID results (82% versus 96%,P= 0.0048). The median LOS was similar (7 days), but more NB-PC patients died from infection (26% versus 8%,P< 0.01). Our findings affirm the need for the inclusion of anaerobes in BioFire BCID or other rapid diagnostic platforms to facilitate the prompt initiation of effective therapy for bacteremia.

METHOD FOR OBTAINING BLOOD CULTURE WHILE DIAGNOSING BLOODSTREAM INFECTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 65 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-190
Author(s):  
N. M. Kargaltseva ◽  
V. I. Kocherovets ◽  
A. Yu. Mironov ◽  
O. Yu. Borisova
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
Blood Sample ◽  
Bloodstream Infection ◽  
Blood Volume ◽  
Venous Blood ◽  
Buffy Coat ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Genetic Identification ◽  
Blood Collection ◽  
Urogenital System

Diagnosing of bloodstream infection (BSI) in outpatients is essential. A large blood volume is required to obtain blood culture (CLSI): 2 sets, 40ml of blood for diagnosing in 95% cases of bacteremia. Molecular-genetic methods can not replace blood culture method, but they accelerate the identification of any pathogen. Culturomics gives a combination of different conditions for isolating microorganisms from a sample and along with their genetic identification. We used the patent method for direct inoculation of buffy-coat from 4,5ml of a venous blood sample and MALDI-ToF identification method. In 382 outpatients examined there were received 183 blood cultures (48,0%), more often among women (65,6%) and young people (74,9%). The causative agents of community-acquired bloodstream infection were aerobes (73,4%), anaerobes (24,2%), fungi (2,4%). The gram-positive cocci were prevailing (51,4%) and the gram-negative rods were isolated rather seldom (9,6%). BSI was monomicrobial (66,5%) and polymicrobial (33,5%). Polymicrobial blood cultures had 2, 3, 4 agents in one blood sample (75,4%, 18,8%, 5,8%, respectively). There were also found combinations of different species of aerobes (47,8%), aerobes with anaerobes (42%). BSI caused complications of the primary disease of the respiratory system, urogenital system and in 100% of cases after plastic surgery. A small blood volume is required for buffy-coat inoculation, the direct agar culture reduces the response time to 2 days, so it makes genetic identification possible on the 2nd day from the moment of blood collection.

scholarly journals Impact of Direct From Blood Culture Identification of Pathogens Paired With Antimicrobial Stewardship Interventions in a Pediatric Hospital

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 802-808
Author(s):  
Lauren M. Puckett ◽  
Poonam Rajkotia ◽  
Lisa Coppola ◽  
Lori Baumgartner ◽  
Amity L. Roberts ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
Positive Blood Culture ◽  
Pediatric Patients ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Improvement Project ◽  
Maldi Tof ◽  
Culture Identification ◽  
Contaminated Blood ◽  
Organism Identification

OBJECTIVE Identification of organisms directly from positive blood culture by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has the potential for improved clinical outcomes through earlier organism identification and shorter time to appropriate clinical intervention. The uses of this technology in pediatric patients and its impact in this patient population have not been well described. METHODS Direct from positive blood culture organism identification via MALDI-TOF was implemented in September 2019. A quality improvement project was performed to assess its impact on admissions for contaminant blood cultures and time to effective and optimal antimicrobials and clinical decision-making. A pre- and post-implementation retrospective review for consecutive September through February time periods, was conducted on patients with positive monomicrobial blood cultures. Statistics were evaluated using Mann-Whitney U and χ2 tests. RESULTS One hundred nineteen patients with 131 unique blood cultures (65 in pre- and 66 in post-implementation) were identified. Time to identification was shorter, median 35.4 hours (IQR, 22.7–54.3) versus 42.3 hours (IQR, 36.5–49) in post- and pre-groups, respectively (p = 0.02). Patients were less likely to be admitted for a contaminated blood culture in the post-implementation, 26% versus 11% in the pre-implementation (p = 0.03) group. In patients treated for bacteremia, there was a shorter time to optimal therapy from Gram stain reporting in the post-implementation (median 42.7 hours [IQR, 27.2–72]) versus pre-implementation (median 60.8 hours [IQR, 42.9–80.6]) (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Direct from positive blood culture identification by MALDI-TOF decreased time to effective and optimal antimicrobials and decreased unnecessary admission in pediatric patients for contaminated blood cultures.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Optimal Blood Culture Incubation Time to Maximize Clinically Relevant Results from a Contemporary Blood Culture Instrument and Media System

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric M. Ransom ◽  
Zahra Alipour ◽  
Meghan A. Wallace ◽  
Carey-Ann D. Burnham
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
Incubation Time ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Culture Media ◽  
Detection System ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Standard Interval ◽  
Media System ◽  
Blood Culture Positivity ◽  
Optimal Incubation

Timely diagnosis of microorganisms in blood cultures is necessary to optimize therapy. Although blood culture media and systems have evolved for decades, the standard interval for incubation prior to discard as negative has remained five days. Here, we evaluated the optimal incubation time for the BACT/ALERT VIRTUO blood culture detection system (bioMérieux) using FA Plus (aerobic) and FN Plus (anaerobic) resin culture bottles in routine clinical use. Following IRB approval, a retrospective review evaluated the outcomes of 158,710 bottles collected between November 2018 and October 2019. The number of positive blood bottles was 13,592 (8.6%); 99% of positive aerobic and anaerobic bottles flagged positive by 91.5 h and 108 h, respectively. The mean (median) time-to-positivity for Staphylococcus aureus was 18.4 h (15.6 h), Escherichia coli 12.3 h (9.5 h), Pseudomonas aeruginosa 22.2 h (15.9 h), and Candida spp. 48.9 h (42.9 h). Only 175 bottles (0.1% of all bottles) flagged positive after four days of incubation; 89 (51%) of these bottles grew Cutibacterium (Propionibacterium) species. Chart review of blood cultures positive after four days (96 h) rarely had clinical impact, and sometimes had a negative impact on patientcare. Finally, a seeded study of the HACEK group, historically associated with delayed blood culture positivity, demonstrated no benefit to extended incubation beyond four days. Collectively, these findings demonstrated that a four-day incubation time was sufficient for the VIRTUO system and media. Implementation of the four-day incubation time could enhance clinically relevant results by reducing recovery of contaminants and finalizing blood cultures one day earlier.

scholarly journals 300. Pediatric Center Evaluation of the BioFire® Blood Culture Identification 2 Panel Versus the Original BioFire®FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification Panel for the Detection of Microorganisms and Resistance Markers in Positive Blood Cultures

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S148-S149
Author(s):  
Kristina B Pierce ◽  
Rebecca Barr ◽  
Aubrie Hopper ◽  
Charlotte Bowerbank ◽  
Anne Shaw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
False Negative ◽  
Bloodstream Infections ◽  
Turnaround Time ◽  
Rapid Identification ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Species Level ◽  
Genus Level ◽  
Antimicrobial Resistance Genes ◽  
Culture Identification

Abstract Background Studies show a rising annual incidence of severe sepsis, with bloodstream infections continuing to impact children. Rapid identification of causative agents and timely administration of targeted therapy can positively impact patient outcomes and improve antibiotic stewardship. The BioFire® Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) Panel (BioFire Diagnostics, LLC), an updated version of the FDA-cleared BioFire® FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification (BCID) Panel, designed for use on positive blood cultures (PBCs), assesses 43 analytes, including 17 novel analytes (8 bacterial, 2 fungal, and 7 antimicrobial resistance genes), with a similar turnaround time. Methods De-identified residual PBCs for which clinician-ordered testing per standard of care (SoC) had been performed were enrolled and tested with an Investigation-Use-Only version of the BCID2 Panel. Only one positive bottle per patient was enrolled. Results of BCID2 and BCID were compared. Results 116 PBCs (48 aerobic and 68 anaerobic) were evaluated using the BioFire BCID2 Panel and results were compared to the BioFire BCID Panel. Of the 116 cases, 103 were positive on both the BioFire BCID2 Panel and the BioFire BCID Panel. Ten cases were negative on both tests. While the two panels showed 97% agreement, three cases were discrepant. Using culture (SoC) as the tiebreaker, two cases were false positive and one case was false negative on the BioFire BCID Panel. In all three cases, results from culture and the BioFire BCID2 Panel were in agreement. As expected, no organisms were detected on the BioFire BCID2 Panel in PBCs from 10% (12/116) of PBC bottles where culture identified only organisms that are not part of the panel menu. With the BioFire BCID2 Panel’s expanded platform, two cases identified as Enterobacteriaceae on the BioFire BCID Panel were identified to the genus level on the BioFire BCID2 Panel; 31 cases detected to the genus level on the BioFire BCID Panel were identified to the species level on the BioFire BCID2 Panel. Conclusion Overall, the BioFire BCID2 Panel performed well against the BioFire BCID Panel for identification of bloodstream pathogens and provided additional discrimination of some pathogens to the genus or species level. Data presented are from assays that have not been cleared or approved for diagnostic use. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

scholarly journals 107. Impact of a Rapid Blood Culture Identification Panel at a Community Teaching Hospital: a Pre-Post Quasi-Experiment

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S68-S69
Author(s):  
Catherine Trinh ◽  
Steven Richardson ◽  
Benjamin Ereshefsky
Keyword(s):  
Targeted Therapy ◽  
Blood Culture ◽  
Culture Collection ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Gram Stain ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Gram Positive ◽  
Days Of Therapy ◽  
Culture Identification ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Rapid diagnostic tests (RDT) for positive blood cultures can lead to quicker identification of organisms and key resistance elements. As a result time to targeted therapy may decrease, thus reducing the duration of broad, empiric antibiotic use. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of implementing the BioFire® FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification (BCID) Panel for gram-positive organisms on antimicrobial process measures and patient outcomes at an academic community hospital. Methods This was a single-center, pre-post intervention, quasi-experimental study evaluating hospitalized adult patients who had at least one positive blood culture with gram-positive organisms from June 1, 2018 to August 31, 2018 and June 1, 2019 to August 31, 2019. Patients in the pre-intervention group were randomized and post-intervention patients were matched by identified organism. The primary outcome was the time to targeted therapy from blood culture collection. Secondary outcomes included time to targeted therapy from positive Gram stain, vancomycin and anti-pseudomonal β-lactam length of therapy (LOT), institutional vancomycin days of therapy (DOT), length of stay (LOS), and estimated hospitalization costs. Results A total of 75 patients in each group were included. The time to targeted therapy from blood culture collection was significantly decreased after RDT implementation [32.9 (23.2–51.8) hours vs. 49.2 (37.1–76.3 hours, p &lt; 0.001)], as was time to targeted therapy from Gram stain results [8.5 (0–25.2) hours vs. 30 (19.4–52.9) hours, p &lt; 0.001]. No difference was found between the groups with respect to LOS or estimated hospitalization cost. Overall the vancomycin LOT [0.86 (0.09–2.38) days vs. 2.18 (1.37–4.34) days, p = 0.001] and anti-pseudomonal β-lactam LOT for MRSA, MSSA, Streptococcus, and Enterococcus subgroup [1.15 (0.06–2.07) vs. 1.78 (1.28–2.89) days, p = 0.026] were significantly decreased in the post-RDT group. Figure 1: Institutional Use of Vnacomycin Conclusion Implementation of a rapid diagnostic test on gram-positive blood cultures was associated with decreased time to targeted therapy from blood culture collection, time to targeted therapy from positive culture, and vancomycin LOT. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

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

2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Szymankiewicz ◽  
Beata Nakonowska
Keyword(s):  
Blood Culture ◽  
Multiplex Pcr ◽  
Accurate Method ◽  
Rapid Identification ◽  
Blood Cultures ◽  
Pcr Assay ◽  
Culture Methods ◽  
Multiplex Pcr Assay ◽  
Oncologic Patients ◽  
Culture Identification

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document