Blood Culture Identification Panel Research Articles

Usefulness of the FilmArray blood culture identification panel for identifying causative pathogens of bone and joint infections

As bone and joint infections (BJIs) require long-term treatment, identifying their causative pathogens is vital. However, the detection rate of conventional culturing remains inadequate. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of the FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) panel for identifying causative pathogens in patients with BJIs. We tested a BCID panel using collected samples, in addition to conventional cultures. The primary outcome was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the BCID panel, calculated using conventional culturing methods. A total of 44 patients who underwent BJI-related specimen collection were enrolled. Of the 44 patients, 22 were diagnosed with a BJI. Conventional culture identified 15 of 22 organisms (68.2%), whereas the BCID panel identified 14 of 22 organisms (63.4%). The overall sensitivity and specificity of the BCID panel were 73.3% and 57.1%, respectively, compared to those of the conventional culture. However, the sensitivity reached 100% when only pathogens included in the BCID panel were considered. In seven culture-negative cases, the BCID panel identified three organisms (42.9%). The BCID panel also indicated the appropriate therapy against a BJI caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by detecting the mecA gene. This study demonstrated that the BCID panel has the potential for early and accurate diagnosis of the causative organism of BJI using specimens such as joint fluid and bone tissue. Our results suggest that BCID panels, in addition to routine culture, may improve our ability to diagnose the causative microorganisms of BJI in clinical practice, thereby contributing to the selection of appropriate antimicrobial agents.

Impact of Adding a Rapid PCR-Based Blood Culture Identification Panel to the Antimicrobial Stewardship Program of Patients with Febrile Neutropenia in a Peruvian Referral Hospital.

The addition of Biofire® FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification panel 2 (BCID2) to the antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) could improve outcomes in bloodstream infections (BSI) of patients with febrile neutropenia (FN). A pre- and post-quasi-experimental single-center study was conducted at a reference hospital in Peru. Three groups were considered: patients with BSI before ASP intervention (control group), patients with BSI after ASP intervention (group 1), and patients with BSI after ASP intervention plus BCID2 PCR Panel implementation (group 2). Overall, 93 patients were identified (32 control, 30 group 1, 31 group 2). The median time to effective therapy was significantly shorter in group 2 compared to group 1 and control group, respectively (3.75 vs. 10 h, p = 0.004; 3.75 vs. 19 h, p < 0.001). No significant differences in terms of relapse of bacteremia, in-hospital mortality (all cause), and 30-day-all-cause hospital readmission between the three study periods were found. The appropriateness of empirical antimicrobial use, adding or change, and the following de-escalation or discontinuation was significant when the two intervention periods were compared with the control group (p < 0.001). In addition to the lack of local studies documenting the microbiological profile of FN episodes, adding syndromic panels-based testing could allow for the consolidation of ASP strategies.

Clinical outcomes associated with blood-culture contamination are not affected by utilization of a rapid blood-culture identification system.

Contaminated blood cultures result in extended hospital stays and extended durations of antibiotic therapy. Rapid molecular-based blood culture testing can speed positive culture detection and improve clinical outcomes, particularly when combined with an antimicrobial stewardship program. We investigated the impact of a multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) FilmArray Blood Culture Identification (BCID) system on clinical outcomes associated with contaminated blood cultures. We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving secondary data analysis at a single institution. In this before-and-after study, patients with contaminated blood cultures in the period before PCR BCID was implemented (ie, the pre-PCR period; n = 305) were compared to patients with contaminated blood cultures during the period after PCR BCID was implemented (ie, the post-PCR implementation period; n = 464). The primary exposure was PCR status and the main outcomes of the study were length of hospital stay and days of antibiotic therapy. We did not detect a significant difference in adjusted mean length of hospital stay before (10.8 days; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.8-11.9) and after (11.2 days; 95% CI, 10.2-12.3) the implementation of the rapid BCID panel in patients with contaminated blood cultures (P = .413). Likewise, adjusted mean days of antibiotic therapy between patients in pre-PCR group (5.1 days; 95% CI, 4.5-5.7) did not significantly differ from patients in post-PCR group (5.3 days; 95% CI, 4.8-5.9; P = .543). The introduction of a rapid PCR-based blood culture identification system did not improve clinical outcomes, such as length of hospital stay and duration of antibiotic therapy, in patients with contaminated blood cultures.

Large-Scale Clinical Evaluation of Rapid Blood Culture Identification Panels for Bloodstream Infections at a Tertiary Hospital

The prompt implementation of optimal antibacterial therapy through the rapid identification of the causative organisms is essential for improving outcomes for critically ill patients with bloodstream infections. We evaluated the clinical performance of the FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) panel for rapidly identifying causative pathogens in the bloodstream using large-scale clinical samples. We analyzed the results of identification using a BCID panel performed on 2005 positive blood culture bottles from September 2019 to June 2022. Pathogen detection efficiency and interval from Gram staining to identification using the BCID panel were compared to those of conventional identification systems-VITEK MS MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometer and Vitek2-and antibiotic susceptibility testing-Vitek2. We detected 2167 isolates from 2005 positive blood culture bottles. In these isolates, the BCID panel showed 93% full agreement-both organisms and antimicrobial resistance genes were matched, and no off-target organisms were detected. Species-level discordance was found in 0.6% of tests. Sixty-five isolates (3.0%) were only detected by BCID, whereas 22 isolates (1.0%) from the on-target panel were not detected by BCID. This large-scale study demonstrated that the BCID panel was a reliable and rapid identification method for directly identifying bloodstream pathogens in a positive blood culture.

Clinical Utility of the FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification (BCID) Panel for the Diagnosis of Neonatal Sepsis.

This prospective single-center study was designed to assess the clinical utility of the FilmArray® blood culture identification (BCID) panel for improving the diagnostic accuracy in neonatal sepsis. Results obtained using the FilmArray® BCID panel were correlated with results of blood culture in all consecutive neonates with suspicion of early-onset (EOS) and late-onset sepsis (LOS) attended in our service over a two-year period. A total of 102 blood cultures from 92 neonates were included, 69 (67.5%) in cases of EOS and 33 (32.3%) in LOS. The FilmArray® BCID panel was performed in negative culture bottles at a median of 10 h of blood culture incubation (IQR 8-20), without differences by the type of sepsis. The FilmArray® BCID panel showed a 66.7% sensitivity, 100% specificity, 100% positive predictive value, and 95.7% negative predictive value. There were four false-negative cases, three of which were Streptococcus epidermidis in neonates with LOS, and there was one case of Granulicatella adiacens in one neonate with EOS. We conclude that the use of the FilmArray® BCID panel in negative blood cultures from neonates with clinical suspicion of sepsis is useful in decision-making of starting or early withdrawal of empirical antimicrobials because of the high specificity and negative predictive values of this assay.

167. Clinical Impact of Rapid Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction-Based Diagnostic Testing for Hospitalized Patients with Bloodstream Infections (BSIs) in a National Cohort of Veterans Affairs Patients

Abstract Background Polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based diagnostic testing for BSIs, such as the BioFire FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification (BCID) Panel, has the potential to shorten time to appropriate therapy and duration of overly broad-spectrum antibiotics. The clinical benefit of PCR-based diagnostic technologies for BSIs has been demonstrated but data supporting their utility in larger multi-center settings are limited. This study sought to evaluate outcomes associated with the implementation of the BioFire BCID in the US Veterans Affairs (VA) system. Table Methods A retrospective multi-center pre-post quasi-experimental study was performed among patients admitted to any VA hospital that adopted BioFire BCID Panel for ≥ 1 year. Patients with ≥ 1 BSI due to bacteria on the BioFire BCID Panel (19 bacterial targets) were included. Exclusion criteria were polymicrobial BSI or death within 48 hours of BSI. Patients were categorized into two groups: i) BSI in the 1-year prior to implementation (pre-BCID) and ii) 1-year post implementation (post-BCID). Post-BCID period commenced 2 months after first BCID-BSI. Outcomes included early de-escalation, defined as a reduction in antimicrobial spectrum score within 48 hours of index BSI, time to appropriate therapy, 30-day mortality, and 90-day CDI incidence. Results A total of 4099 patients across 33 VA facilities met study criteria (n=2088 pre-BCID; n=2011 post- BCID). Groups were similar at baseline (Table). BioFire BCID implementation was associated with an improvement in early de-escalation (38.3% in post-BCID vs 34.8% in pre-BCID, p=0.02) and reduction in median (IQR) time to appropriate therapy (8 [4-19] hours in post-BCID vs 9 [3-19] hours in pre-BCID, P&amp;lt; 0.01). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (11.1% in post-BCID vs 12.4% in pre-BCID, p=0.2) or CDI (4.6% in post-BCID vs 4.8% in pre-BCID, p=0.8) between BCID groups. Conclusion In this large VA cohort study, implementation of the BioFire BCID panel was associated with a significant improvement in early antimicrobial de-escalation and time to appropriate therapy. These data suggest this rapid diagnostic technology aids in optimization of antimicrobial use in hospitalized VA patients with BSIs. Disclosures Nicholas Britt, PharmD, MS, Gilead Sciences: Advisor/Consultant|Gilead Sciences: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Grant/Research Support|Shionogi: Grant/Research Support Karim Khader, PhD, BioFire Diagnostics: Grant/Research Support Tristan T. Timbrook, PharmD, bioMerieux: Employee of bioMerieux Thomas Lodise, Jr., Pharm.D., PhD, BioFire Diagnostics: Grant/Research Support|cidara: Advisor/Consultant|cidara: Honoraria|Entasis: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Merck: Grant/Research Support|Paratek: Advisor/Consultant|Shionogi: Advisor/Consultant|Spero: Advisor/Consultant|Venatrox: Advisor/Consultant.

913. Impact of BioFire® FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification Panels on Time to Optimal Antimicrobial Therapy

Abstract Background Bloodstream infections are associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and costs. Timely initiation of effective treatment is required for optimal outcomes. Conventional microbiological techniques require 72 hours for organism identification; however, rapid blood culture identification (BCID) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) panels have expedited this process. At Atlantic Health System, the BioFire® FilmArray® BCID panel was implemented June 2020 (BCID1), with subsequent upgrade to BCID2 March 2021. Notable features of the BCID2 panel include speciation of Enterococcus spp. and the addition of the CTX-M target. The purpose of this study is to assess time to optimal therapy (TTOT) with and without the BCID platforms for select organisms. Table 1:Select Primary and Secondary Endpoints Methods This retrospective study of hospitalized, adult patients was conducted at two community teaching hospitals from 5/2019 to 12/2021. Patients with a blood culture positive for Enterococcus faecalis, E. faecium, Proteus spp., Escherichia coli, or non-aerogenes Klebsiella spp. were included. Patients with polymicrobial or presumed polymicrobial source of bacteremia, recent positive blood cultures, PCR not performed in BCID arms, or who were deceased/comfort care at time of Gram stain were excluded. The primary endpoint was TTOT. Secondary endpoints included time to effective therapy, duration of vancomycin, therapy modification 24 hours after Gram stain result, and length of stay. All analyses compared PreBCID to either BCID1 or BCID2 arm. Results Three hundred patients (100 per arm) were included. Patient characteristics were similar across study arms. The median Pitt Bacteremia Score was 1, the most common organism identified was E. coli (65%), the most common source of bacteremia was genitourinary (65%), and 11% of isolates produced ESBL. TTOT (days) was similar in PreBCID compared to BCID1 and BCID2 [(2.48 vs. 2.65, p=0.10); (2.48 vs. 2.37 days, p=0.27)]. TTOT was significantly longer in the gram-negative subgroup of the BCID1 arm compared to PreBCID (2.62 vs 1.85 days, p=0.03). See Table 1 for full analyses. Conclusion Implementation of the BCID panels did not reduce TTOT in select organisms at our institution. Barriers to benefit may include limited education and lack of formal antimicrobial stewardship team involvement. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

359. The Clinical Utility of the GenMark Dx ePlex® Fungal Blood Culture Identification Panel

Abstract Background The GenMark ePlex® Fungal Blood Culture Identification (BCID) Panel utilizes electrowetting technology to detect 15 most common causes of fungemia. Rapid identification of fungal species and innate resistance patterns enable improved antifungal stewardship. Methods In this prospective study, aliquots of the initial diagnostic blood culture bottle with fungal organisms detected on Gram Stain (n=61) received standard of care (SOC) fungal identification in two study periods. MALDI-TOF MS was utilized in both phases. BCID-FP results were not reported to treating clinicians during the pre-implementation phase. After 35 isolates, BCID-FP results became part of the SOC for all bloodstream infections (implementation phase) with results available to providers. Chart reviews were performed to assess risk factors for candidemia and evaluate the potential then actual impact of the BCID-FP on the time to organism identification, treatment, and patient outcomes. Results A total of 61 patients were included in the final analysis, 35 in the pre-implementation phase and 26 in the post-implementation phase (Table 1). C. albicans was most common, followed by C. glabrata and C. parapsilosis. The cohort includes two cases of Cryptococcus as well as two rare yeasts unable to be identified by BCID-FP and requiring the state lab identification (Table 2). Overall outcomes and differences between groups are seen in Table 3. The BCID-FP identified species 1.4 days faster compared to SOC methods across all patients, 1.12 days in the pre-implementation phase vs. 1.81 days in the post-implementation phase. In 32 patients (52%), the BCID-FP allowed for an earlier change in antifungal therapy for species with known low risk of fluconazole resistance. Conclusion The BCID-FP enabled earlier fungal identification compared to SOC identification. Earlier identification allows for earlier antifungal stewardship as well as better empiric therapy for non-Candida­ fungal pathogens. Empiric therapy rates were low with high mortality rates, indicative of an ongoing need for improving the care of patients with fungemia. Disclosures Todd P. McCarty, MD, GenMark Dx: Grant/Research Support|GenMark Dx: Honoraria Sixto M. Leal, Jr., MD, PhD, GenMark Dx: Grant/Research Support|GenMark Dx: Honoraria.

197. The Clinical Impact of Early Detection of ESBL-Producing Enterobacterales with PCR-Based Blood Culture Assays

Abstract Background Bloodstream infections (BSIs) due to extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing Enterobacterales can cause significant morbidity and mortality. The first-line treatment for these is a carbapenem. ESBL-encoding genes such as blactx-m can be detected by ePlex® Blood Culture Identification (BCID) panels by utilizing polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based techniques. Our primary objective was to assess the impact of BCID on time to appropriate therapy; secondary objectives were to assess the clinical impact on mortality, 30-day readmission, and length of stay (LOS). Methods This study was a retrospective multicenter observational study of hospitalized patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacterales positive blood cultures. Patients with ESBLs identified in the final blood culture by conventional methods pre-ePlex® BCID (Jan 1 to Sep 30, 2019) were compared to patients with ESBLs identified by ePlex® BCID (Jan 1 to Sep 30, 2021). Patients who expired or were discharged prior to Gram stain results were excluded. Time to appropriate therapy was defined as the time from Gram stain result to ordering a carbapenem. In-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission rate, and LOS were analyzed for each cohort. T-test and Chi-square test were performed. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for pre-ePlex BICD (2019) and post-ePlex BCID (2021) groups Results ESBL BSIs in 503 patients across 11 hospitals were identified and a total of 281 patients (pre-ePlex® BCID n=130; ePlex® BCID n=151) were included. A significant decrease in the median time to carbapenem order was observed (44.5 hours in the pre-ePlex® BCID group vs. 8 hours in the ePlex® BCID group (p&amp;lt; 0.001)). No significant difference was observed in in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmissions, or LOS. The mortality rates were 6.9% and 6.6%, the 30-day readmission rates were 7.7% and 12.6%, and the LOS were 8 days and 10 days, respectively in the pre- and post-ePlex® BCID groups. Comparison of outcome measure results between the pre-ePlex BICD (2019) and post-ePlex BCID (2021) groups. Box and whisker graphs for time from Gram stain result to ordering carbapenems (hours) Conclusion Implementing ePlex® BCID to detect ESBL BSIs decreased the median time to escalation to carbapenems by 36 hours. Despite the decrease in time to appropriate therapy, no change in in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission, and LOS was observed. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

535. Evaluation of the BioFire Blood Culture Identification (BCID2) panel for transplant recipients with a bloodstream infection

Abstract Background In patients with bloodstream infections (BSI), the BioFire blood culture identification (BCID2) multiplex PCR panel is associated with decreased time to organism identification and antimicrobial susceptibility results needed to guide optimal therapy. While the performance of BCID2 has been evaluated in the general population, data for transplant recipients are limited. We sought to identify the utility of the BCID2 panel in transplant recipients. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted to identify all solid organ recipients (SOTR) and bone marrow transplant recipients (BMTR) within 2 years of transplantation with BSI for whom BCID2 was performed from 06/2021 to 01/2022. Demographic and microbiological data were collected. Positive blood cultures for the same patient and same organism(s) occurring within 14 days of the initial test were considered a single BSI event. Descriptive statistics were performed. Results A total of 29 transplant recipients with 45 positive blood cultures underwent BCID2 testing. Mean age was 54 years, 69% were BMTR and 53% of cultures were from peripheral sites. A total of 51 organisms were recovered from 45 blood cultures. Organisms identified by blood cultures included Enterobacterales (45%), Enterococcus spp (20%), Candida spp (8%), non-Enterobacterales gram negative rods (14%), Streptococcus spp (8%), and other gram positives (5%). No anaerobic organisms were isolated. BCID2 did not detect 7/51 (14%) organisms identified by blood cultures including monomicrobial (n=6/39) and polymicrobial (n=1/6) cultures. All 7 organisms not identified by BCID2 were not in the BCID2 database. All occurred in BMTR; 4 were considered pathogenic and treated with antimicrobials vs. 3 contaminants (Table 1). BCID2 detected CTX-M or Van A/B in all 15 samples with ceftriaxone (n=9) or vancomycin resistance(n=6). Conclusion In transplant recipients, BCID2 detected 86% of organisms and 100% of resistance markers identified by conventional testing. All 7 (14%) missed cases involved off-target organisms, of which 4 were considered pathogenic. BCID2 is a useful tool for BSI detection in transplant recipients, but providers should consider the possibility of off-target pathogens when clinically appropriate. Disclosures David Peaper, MD, Tangen Biosciences: Stocks/Bonds Maricar F. Malinis, MD, Aicuris: Primary Investigator of Clinical Trial at Yale Site|Takeda: Primary investigator of clinical trial at Yale Site Maricar F. Malinis, MD, Aicuris: Primary Investigator of Clinical Trial at Yale Site|Takeda: Primary investigator of clinical trial at Yale Site.

193. Rapid Diagnostic Testing and Vancomycin Utilization for Contaminated Blood Cultures

Abstract Background Bacteremia is a prevalent hospital acquired infection that affects nearly one in ten hospitalized patients. Rates of contaminated blood cultures have ranged from 0.6% to 6% in the literature. Vancomycin is often chosen as empiric coverage for gram positive organisms while awaiting bacterial identification. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of GenMark ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panel (BCID) implementation on the duration of vancomycin therapy for blood cultures contaminated with coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS). Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients meeting inclusion criteria during a six month period prior to BCID implementation and post BCID implementation, from 03/01/2019 to 08/31/2019 and 03/01/2021 to 08/31/2021. The primary outcome analyzed was the duration of vancomycin therapy, in hours, in patients with a contaminated blood culture. Contaminated blood cultures was defined as a single blood culture growing CoNS. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, readmission for treatment of contaminated blood cultures, and nephrotoxicity. Results This IRB-approved study included 190 patients, 75 in the pre-BCID group and 115 in the post-BCID group. The average duration of vancomycin therapy was 53.7 hours in the pre-BCID group and 20.5 hours in the post-BCID group (p = 0.04). Time to organism identification was reduced from 22.8 hours in the pre-BCID group to 12 hours in the post-BCID group (p = 0.5). Additionally, our study did not find a difference in nephrotoxicity, hospital length of stay, or readmissions between the two groups. Conclusion Following implementation of the GenMark ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panel (BCID), there was a reduction in both duration of vancomycin therapy and time to culture identification for blood cultures contaminated with CoNS. Rapid diagnostic testing is helpful in clinical decision-making and can lead to earlier discontinuation of empiric antibiotics, such as vancomycin. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures.

181. Impact of Rapid Diagnostic Technology on Patients with Candidemia

Abstract Background Candida spp. are the fourth most common cause of bloodstream infections (BSI) in the United States and have an associated mortality rate of 19-40.5%. Mortality rates are further impacted by delay in time to adequate antifungal therapy, historically due to delayed time to identification on culture. The utilization of rapid diagnostic technology (RDT) has been effective in timely identification of bacterial pathogens causing BSI, but RDT for fungal organisms has demonstrated mixed results. At AdventHealth Central Florida Division South (CFD-S), pharmacists provide 24-hour coverage for real-time notification of all positive blood culture results. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of the GenMark ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels (BCID) fungal pathogen (FP) panel paired with 24/7, pharmacist-driven response in patients with candidemia. Methods This multi-site, pre/post, retrospective chart review included adult patients admitted to CFD-S with at least one positive blood culture with Candida spp. from June 2019 through May 2020 (pre-RDT), and August 2020 through July 2021 (post-RDT). Patients receiving systemic antifungal prophylaxis, with known candidiasis at time of index RDT result, or who discharged prior to culture positivity were excluded. The primary outcome was time to effective antifungal therapy in patients with candidemia. Results A total of 200 patients were included in the study (100 pre-RDT and 100 post-RDT). Overall, patients had a median age of 61 years and 50% were male. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1; median APACHEII score differed by three points (13.5 vs. 16.5). Time to effective therapy was similar between groups (39.8 vs. 38.5 hours, p=0.217). There was no difference in secondary outcomes (Table 2) other than ICU length of stay (2.5 vs. 6.0 days, p=0.033) and all-cause in-hospital mortality (15% vs. 30%, p=0.011). Conclusion Pharmacist-driven, real-time response to RDT did not significantly impact time to effective antifungal therapy in patients with candidemia. Higher rate of in-hospital mortality was likely a reflection of increased severity of illness in the post-RDT group. Disclosures Amy L. Carr, PharmD, BCIDP, Shionogi: Advisory Board.

Check the melting temperature of the FilmArray BCID panel to avoid missed detection of vanM-type enterococci

PurposeWe aimed to evaluate whether the FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) panel holds the ability to detect vanM-type vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) clinical isolates effectively. MethodsTwenty VRE clinical strains, including 10 vanA-type VRE and 10 vanM-type VRE, were collected from patients in five tertiary hospitals, Shanghai, China. By conventional PCR and sequencing, the strains were identified and van genotypes were confirmed. All VRE strains were investigated using the FilmArray BCID panel. All results, including enterococcus assay, vanA/B assay, DNA melting curves and melting temperature (Tm), were recorded. We also compared these results with those obtained via the conventional PCR and sequencing. ResultsAccording to the instructions of the FilmArray BCID panel, the Enterococcus assay is used to identify species and vanA/B assay is used to detect van genes. In all vanA-type VRE, the Enterococcus assay and vanA/B assay were positive. The results correctly showed that the tested strains were VRE. However, in 10 vanM-type VRE, the Enterococcus assay was positive and vanA/B assay were negative. The results mistakenly showed that the tested strains were vancomycin-sensitive enterococci (VSE). In the vanA/B assay, the melting curves of vanM-type VRE were similar to that of vanA-type VRE, but the Tm values were lower. The Tm values were then compared against the expected Tm range for the vanA/B assay. The Tm values of vanM-type VRE fall outside the assay-specific Tm range, resulting in negative reports. Thus, by adjusting the expected Tm range for the Enterococcus assay, the FilmArray BCID panel holds the ability to detect vanM-type VRE. ConclusionsThe vanM-type VRE isolates can be effectively detected by optimizing the expected Tm range for the vanA/B assay.

Impact of Adding Rapid Polymerase Chain Reaction-based Blood Culture Identification Panel to Antimicrobial Stewardship Program: Initial Experience.

How to cite this article: Arjun R, Niyas VKM, John KE, Nair A, Hussain F. Impact of Adding Rapid Polymerase Chain Reaction-based Blood Culture Identification Panel to Antimicrobial Stewardship Program: Initial Experience. Indian J Crit Care Med 2022;26(10):1155-1157.

Concordance of the filmarray blood culture identification panel 2 and classical microbiological methods in a bacteriemia diagnostic unit

Our study evaluates the effectiveness of the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification Panel 2 in a rapid bacteremia diagnostic system, using bacteriological culture as a reference. A total of 2042 positive blood cultures were analyzed, the FilmArray was performed for 175. Concordance was higher in monomicrobial bacteremia (95%) than in polymicrobial bacteremia's (72.2%). For detecting bacterial resistance mechanisms, concordance was very high (100% for Gram-positive bacteria and 98.12% for Gram-negative). This methodology provides significant improvements in response time and is especially useful for the detection of monomicrobial bacteremia.

#23 Clinical Outcomes with Rapid Gram-Positive Blood Culture Identification in an Academic Pediatric Hospital

Abstract Background BACKGROUND Delays in initiating appropriate antibiotics increases mortality, length of stay, and overall admissions costs in patients with bloodstream infections. Adult studies using rapid diagnostic tests such as the GenMark’s e-Plex Blood Culture Identification (BCID) Panels coupled with Antimicrobial Stewardship Program (ASP) interventions have led to reductions in each of these metrics. Similar data assessing use in the pediatric population are generally lacking. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of the GenMark Blood Culture Identification Gram Positive panel (BCID-GP panel) on the time to optimal antimicrobial therapy (OAT) in pediatric patients with positive blood cultures growing gram-positive bacteria (GPB). Method METHOD A 2-year Quality Improvement study of admitted pediatric patients was carried out at UPMC Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh (CHP) between June 25, 2019 and June 26, 2021. Pre-intervention data (6/25/19 – 6/25/20) was collected retrospectively from the CHP Electronic Medical Record (EMR). During the post-intervention time-period (6/26/20 - 6/26/21), BCID-GP panel was run daily from 6AM to 10 PM on blood cultures with Gram stains revealing GPB. Results were provided to the ASP who generated recommendations and communicated them to the patient’s primary team after reviewing the EMR using a pre-determined algorithm. Statistical analyses were performed using Wilcoxon rank sum test and Chi-squared tests. Results RESULTS 317 and 265 blood cultures with GPB were evaluated in the pre- and post-intervention groups, with median ages of 2.26 and 3.2 years in the 2 groups, respectively. Overall panel accuracy was 97% with gene accuracy of 100%. Percent compliance with ASP recommendations within 12 hours was 89%. The median time to OAT was 48 (range of 0-175), and 33.1 hours (range 0-165) in the pre- and post-intervention groups, respectively (p &amp;lt;0.001). The median time to OAT for patients with MSSA decreased from 65 to 30.5 hours (p &amp;lt;0.001), and 37 to 20 hours (p 0.048) for those with MRSA. Antibacterial therapy was avoided in 42.2% of patients in the post-intervention group when results were interpreted as contaminants, compared with 23.4% in the pre-intervention group with this assessment (p = 0.008). Length of stay and 30-day mortality was similar between groups, 6.1 days vs 6.9 days (p = 0.23) and 3.5% vs 3.4%, (p = 1.00) respectively. Conclusion CONCLUSION Use of BCID-GP panel significantly decreased the time to OAT and avoided initiation of antibiotics in incidences of contamination in our study population. This was also true for positive blood cultures due to MSSA and MRSA. However, significant differences in the length of stay or 30-day mortality were not identified between groups. We did find the overall accuracy, defined as the percentage of BCID panels detected targets confirmed by conventional laboratory culture and gene accuracy, defined as the percent of BCID panels with results detected confirmed by conventional laboratory susceptibility methods, of the panel mirrored with previously published data. We also found ASP recommendations based on the BCID-GP were followed 89% of the time within 12 hours of them being made.

Assessment of the effects of rapid diagnostic biofire blood culture identification panel in hospitalized patients

Background: Bloodstream infections (BSIs) have life-threatening consequences; they contribute to increased global morbidity and mortality, particularly in critically ill patients. Consequently, early implementation of effective antimicrobial therapy is crucial. Microbiology stewardship efforts, such as rapid diagnostic testing, streamline healthcare resources while also optimizing clinical outcomes. These outcomes include decreased mortality, fewer days of hospitalization, and more efficient time to appropriate anti-infective regimens. Biofire Blood Culture Identification (BCID) is a 2-stage multiplexed PCR system yielding multiple pathogen etiologies, as well as antimicrobial resistance genes. Results are published ~60 minutes after a blood-culture Gram stain turns positive. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical impact of rapid diagnostic PCR testing, which was introduced at Saint Francis Hospital in March 2020. Methods: We conducted a single-center, retrospective observational chart review before and after implementation of Biofire BCID, surveying all positive cultures from December 2019 through June 2020. Medical records were more thoroughly reviewed for patients who met study inclusion criteria. The primary outcome of interest, time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy, included both days to targeted therapy in the setting of a probable pathogen, and days to antibiotic discontinuation in the case of a likely contaminant (nonpathogenic normal skin flora introduced into culture at the time of collection or processing). Secondary outcomes included in-hospital mortality (death during hospitalization), and inpatient length of stay (LOS). Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used for primary outcomes and Fisher exact tests were used for secondary outcomes. Results: Among 643 patients with positive blood cultures, 410 (63.8%) met the criteria. In the study, 220 patients before the intervention and 190 patients after the intervention were reviewed. The difference in mean days to targeted therapy with a probable pathogen and days to antibiotic discontinuation with a likely contaminant were both observed at a significance level (3.62 vs 1.79, P Inpatient mortality rates were higher prior to launching Biofire BCID, but they were not statistically significant (15.5% vs 14.2 %; P = .782). The average LOS before and after implementation was 12.6 days (range, 2–92 days), and 10 days (range, 2–68 days), respectively. This parameter was also not statistically significant (P = .597). Conclusions: We detected a trend toward a significant reduction in time to appropriate antimicrobial therapy following the launch of Biofire BCID. Incorporation of molecular rapid diagnostics for BSI evaluation should be the standard of care in hospital settings.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

Performance of the new FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 panel and its potential impact on clinical use in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia

IntroductionRapid diagnostic tests have been developed recently for rapid species or resistance genes identification, offering the potential to improve the selection of appropriate antibiotics. The newly developed FilmArray Blood Culture Identification 2 (BCID2) panel, which can identify more species and resistance genes, such as extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, is expected to make an impact on antimicrobial practice. MethodsThe consecutive 50 inpatients with Gram-negative bacilli bacteremia were enrolled to this retrospective single-center study. In addition to the existing FilmArray Blood Culture Identification (BCID) panel, we have implemented BCID2 panel for positive blood culture. The sensitivity and specificity of BCID and BCID2 panel were respectively calculated, and a simulation study of time to effective, optimal and de-escalation therapy was performed based on BCID or BCID2 result. ResultsA total of 52 Gram-negative organisms in 50 patients were identified from blood cultures. Of these, 45 (87%) organisms were detected by BCID2 panel, which was more than BCID panel (41 organisms, 79%). BCID2 panel detected 5 CTX-M genes, which were concordant with conventional method. The time to effective therapy did not differ between BCID arm and BCID2 arm; however, the median time to optimal therapy (34 h in BCID arm and 26 h in BCID2 arm, P = 0.0007) and the median time to de-escalation therapy (42 h in BCID arm and 22 h in BCID2 arm, P = 0.0005) were significantly shortened. ConclusionsThis simulation study of BCID2 panel showed high sensitivity and specificity, and the potential impact on shortening the time to optimal and de-escalation therapy.

Concordance of the Filmarray Blood Culture Identification Panel 2 and Classical Microbiological Methods in a Bacteriemia Diagnostic Unit

Concordance of the Filmarray Blood Culture Identification Panel 2 and Classical Microbiological Methods in a Bacteriemia Diagnostic Unit

The Impact of the FilmArray-Based Detection of Microbial Pathogens from Positive Blood Culture Vials on the Time to Optimal Antimicrobial Regimen in Intensive Care Units of the Helios University Clinic Wuppertal, Germany.

The role of empirical therapy and time to first effective treatment, including the antimicrobial stewardship program, are decisive in patients presenting with bloodstream infections (BSI). The FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification Panel (FA BCID 1.0) detects 24 bacterial and fungal pathogens as well as 3 resistance genes from positive blood cultures in approximately 70 min. In this paper, we evaluate the impact of the additional FA BCID analysis on the time to an optimal antimicrobial therapy and on the length of stay in the ICU, ICU mortality, and PCT level reduction. This retro-/prospective trial was conducted in BSI patients in the ICU at a German tertiary care hospital. A total of 179 individual patients with 200 episodes of BSI were included in the prospective intervention group, and 150 patients with 170 episodes of BSI in the retrospective control group. In the intervention group, BSI data were analyzed including the MALDI-TOF MS (matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry) and FA BCID results from January 2019 to August 2020; the data from the control group, including the MALDI-TOF results, were collected retrospectively from the year 2018. The effective and appropriate antimicrobial regimen occurred in a median of 17 hours earlier in the intervention versus control group (p = 0.071). Furthermore, changes in the antimicrobial regimens of the intervention group that did not immediately lead to an optimal therapy occurred significantly earlier by a median of 24 hours (p = 0.029). Surrogate markers, indicating an earlier recovery of the patients from the intervention group, such as length of stay at the ICU, duration of mechanical ventilation, or an earlier reduction in PCT level, were not significantly affected. However, mortality did not differ between the patient groups. A postulated reduction of the antimicrobial therapy, in those cases in which coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species were identified, did occur in the control group, but not in the intervention group (p = 0.041). The implementation of FA BCID into the laboratory workflow can improve patient care by optimizing antimicrobial regimen earlier in BSI patients as it provides rapid and accurate results for key pathogens associated with BSI, as well as important antimicrobial resistance markers, e.g., mecA or vanA.