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

Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992) Pub Date : 2024-12-16 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1806-9282.20241038
Tuba Tatlı Kış, Can Biçmen, Suleyman Yıldırım, Ozlem Ediboğlu, Fatma Sebnem Yıldız, Ayriz Tuba Gunduz, Ferhat Demirci, Cenk Kıraklı
{"title":"Evaluation of the effect of BioFire FilmArray nested multiplex polymerase chain reaction method on rapid pathogen identification and antimicrobial stewardship in sepsis.","authors":"Tuba Tatlı Kış, Can Biçmen, Suleyman Yıldırım, Ozlem Ediboğlu, Fatma Sebnem Yıldız, Ayriz Tuba Gunduz, Ferhat Demirci, Cenk Kıraklı","doi":"10.1590/1806-9282.20241038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":94194,"journal":{"name":"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)","volume":"70 12","pages":"e20241038"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira (1992)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9282.20241038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信