Biofire FilmArray关节感染面板的实际性能和临床影响的前瞻性评估。

IF 3.7 2区 生物学 Q2 MICROBIOLOGY
Microbiology spectrum Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-25 DOI:10.1128/spectrum.02239-24
Benjamin Berinson, Konstantin Tanida, Laura Spenke, Lukas Krivec, Johannes Keller, Tim Rolvien, Martin Christner, Marc Lütgehetmann, Martin Aepfelbacher, Till Orla Klatte, Holger Rohde
{"title":"Biofire FilmArray关节感染面板的实际性能和临床影响的前瞻性评估。","authors":"Benjamin Berinson, Konstantin Tanida, Laura Spenke, Lukas Krivec, Johannes Keller, Tim Rolvien, Martin Christner, Marc Lütgehetmann, Martin Aepfelbacher, Till Orla Klatte, Holger Rohde","doi":"10.1128/spectrum.02239-24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Limitations of culture-based diagnostic approaches in pathogen detection in joint infections (JI) can be overcome by amplification-based, molecular assays. Recently, a syndromic panel PCR (spPCR) assay (Biofire JI panel; BJA) was approved for pathogen identification from synovial fluid (SF). Here, the performance and the clinical impact of the BJA were assessed in comparison to standard of care diagnostics in a prospective cohort of patients presenting with symptoms consistent with JI. One hundred sixty-five synovial fluids underwent analysis using the BJA. The results were compared with culture-based diagnostics. Discrepant results were re-analyzed using species-specific PCRs or 16S-rDNA sequencing. Clinical data from patients were collected to evaluate the impact on patient management. Twenty-seven of 165 (16.3%) synovial fluid cultures grew bacterial pathogens. In 24/27 cases, the BJA results were concordant. In one case, the cultured pathogen was missed, but three additional pathogens were identified. In 11 culture-negative cases, BJA identified a pathogen. Mean turnaround time in culture-positive samples was 14:11 h and 35:17 h in BJA and culture, respectively. In 11 cases, antibiotic therapy was optimized, based on BJA results. This study demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity (96.3% and 97.8%, respectively) of BJA, as well as a shorter turnaround time than culture-based techniques (21 h faster). Based on analysis of clinical data, antibiotic therapy was optimized due to BJA results in 11 cases. Care must be taken, as important pathogens in prosthetic JI are not included in the panel, restricting its value here.IMPORTANCEPathogen detection is critical for targeted management of joint infections; however, cultural detection of pathogens can be challenging. The Biofire Joint Infection Assay (BJA) is a syndromic panel PCR test that allows culture-independent detection of 31 pathogens. The diagnostic performance and clinical impact were evaluated in a cohort of 160 patients with native and prosthetic joint infections. BJA detected concordant pathogens in 24 of 27 culture-positive cases and enabled the detection of additional pathogens in 11 patients. The time to result was significantly shorter than with standard culture-based diagnostics (14 vs 35 h), and BJA allowed optimization of therapy in 11 patients. The data show that BJA is a relevant addition to the diagnostic options for joint infections. Limitations result from incomplete detection of relevant pathogens, especially in prosthetic joint infections. The use of BJA in daily practice must therefore be accompanied by diagnostic stewardship measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":18670,"journal":{"name":"Microbiology spectrum","volume":" ","pages":"e0223924"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11960074/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prospective evaluation of real-world performance and clinical impact of the Biofire FilmArray joint infection panel.\",\"authors\":\"Benjamin Berinson, Konstantin Tanida, Laura Spenke, Lukas Krivec, Johannes Keller, Tim Rolvien, Martin Christner, Marc Lütgehetmann, Martin Aepfelbacher, Till Orla Klatte, Holger Rohde\",\"doi\":\"10.1128/spectrum.02239-24\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Limitations of culture-based diagnostic approaches in pathogen detection in joint infections (JI) can be overcome by amplification-based, molecular assays. Recently, a syndromic panel PCR (spPCR) assay (Biofire JI panel; BJA) was approved for pathogen identification from synovial fluid (SF). Here, the performance and the clinical impact of the BJA were assessed in comparison to standard of care diagnostics in a prospective cohort of patients presenting with symptoms consistent with JI. One hundred sixty-five synovial fluids underwent analysis using the BJA. The results were compared with culture-based diagnostics. Discrepant results were re-analyzed using species-specific PCRs or 16S-rDNA sequencing. Clinical data from patients were collected to evaluate the impact on patient management. Twenty-seven of 165 (16.3%) synovial fluid cultures grew bacterial pathogens. In 24/27 cases, the BJA results were concordant. In one case, the cultured pathogen was missed, but three additional pathogens were identified. In 11 culture-negative cases, BJA identified a pathogen. Mean turnaround time in culture-positive samples was 14:11 h and 35:17 h in BJA and culture, respectively. In 11 cases, antibiotic therapy was optimized, based on BJA results. This study demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity (96.3% and 97.8%, respectively) of BJA, as well as a shorter turnaround time than culture-based techniques (21 h faster). Based on analysis of clinical data, antibiotic therapy was optimized due to BJA results in 11 cases. Care must be taken, as important pathogens in prosthetic JI are not included in the panel, restricting its value here.IMPORTANCEPathogen detection is critical for targeted management of joint infections; however, cultural detection of pathogens can be challenging. The Biofire Joint Infection Assay (BJA) is a syndromic panel PCR test that allows culture-independent detection of 31 pathogens. The diagnostic performance and clinical impact were evaluated in a cohort of 160 patients with native and prosthetic joint infections. BJA detected concordant pathogens in 24 of 27 culture-positive cases and enabled the detection of additional pathogens in 11 patients. The time to result was significantly shorter than with standard culture-based diagnostics (14 vs 35 h), and BJA allowed optimization of therapy in 11 patients. The data show that BJA is a relevant addition to the diagnostic options for joint infections. Limitations result from incomplete detection of relevant pathogens, especially in prosthetic joint infections. The use of BJA in daily practice must therefore be accompanied by diagnostic stewardship measures.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18670,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Microbiology spectrum\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e0223924\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11960074/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Microbiology spectrum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"99\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02239-24\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"生物学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microbiology spectrum","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02239-24","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于培养的诊断方法在关节感染(JI)病原体检测中的局限性可以通过基于扩增的分子分析来克服。最近,一种综合征面板PCR (spPCR)检测(Biofire JI面板;BJA)被批准用于滑液(SF)病原体鉴定。在本研究中,在一组与JI症状一致的前瞻性队列患者中,对BJA的表现和临床影响进行了评估,并与标准护理诊断进行了比较。使用BJA对165种滑液进行了分析。将结果与基于培养的诊断进行比较。使用物种特异性pcr或16S-rDNA测序重新分析差异结果。收集患者的临床资料以评估对患者管理的影响。165例滑液培养中有27例(16.3%)培养出致病菌。24/27例BJA结果一致。在一个病例中,没有发现培养的病原体,但又发现了另外三种病原体。在11例培养阴性病例中,BJA鉴定出病原体。培养阳性样品的平均周转时间分别为14:11 h和35:17 h。在11例患者中,根据BJA结果优化抗生素治疗。本研究表明,BJA的敏感性和特异性分别为96.3%和97.8%,周转时间比基于培养的技术短(快21 h)。根据临床资料分析,11例患者因BJA结果优化抗生素治疗。必须小心,因为假体JI中的重要病原体不包括在面板中,限制了它在这里的价值。病原体检测对关节感染的靶向治疗至关重要;然而,病原体的培养检测可能具有挑战性。Biofire联合感染检测(BJA)是一种综合征面板PCR检测,可以独立于培养检测31种病原体。对160例自体和假体关节感染患者的诊断性能和临床影响进行了评估。BJA在27例培养阳性病例中检测到24例一致的病原体,并在11例患者中检测到额外的病原体。获得结果的时间明显短于标准的基于培养的诊断(14小时vs 35小时),并且BJA允许对11例患者的治疗进行优化。数据显示BJA是关节感染诊断选项的一个相关补充。限制是由于相关病原体检测不完全,特别是在假体关节感染中。因此,在日常实践中使用BJA必须伴随着诊断管理措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prospective evaluation of real-world performance and clinical impact of the Biofire FilmArray joint infection panel.

Limitations of culture-based diagnostic approaches in pathogen detection in joint infections (JI) can be overcome by amplification-based, molecular assays. Recently, a syndromic panel PCR (spPCR) assay (Biofire JI panel; BJA) was approved for pathogen identification from synovial fluid (SF). Here, the performance and the clinical impact of the BJA were assessed in comparison to standard of care diagnostics in a prospective cohort of patients presenting with symptoms consistent with JI. One hundred sixty-five synovial fluids underwent analysis using the BJA. The results were compared with culture-based diagnostics. Discrepant results were re-analyzed using species-specific PCRs or 16S-rDNA sequencing. Clinical data from patients were collected to evaluate the impact on patient management. Twenty-seven of 165 (16.3%) synovial fluid cultures grew bacterial pathogens. In 24/27 cases, the BJA results were concordant. In one case, the cultured pathogen was missed, but three additional pathogens were identified. In 11 culture-negative cases, BJA identified a pathogen. Mean turnaround time in culture-positive samples was 14:11 h and 35:17 h in BJA and culture, respectively. In 11 cases, antibiotic therapy was optimized, based on BJA results. This study demonstrates high sensitivity and specificity (96.3% and 97.8%, respectively) of BJA, as well as a shorter turnaround time than culture-based techniques (21 h faster). Based on analysis of clinical data, antibiotic therapy was optimized due to BJA results in 11 cases. Care must be taken, as important pathogens in prosthetic JI are not included in the panel, restricting its value here.IMPORTANCEPathogen detection is critical for targeted management of joint infections; however, cultural detection of pathogens can be challenging. The Biofire Joint Infection Assay (BJA) is a syndromic panel PCR test that allows culture-independent detection of 31 pathogens. The diagnostic performance and clinical impact were evaluated in a cohort of 160 patients with native and prosthetic joint infections. BJA detected concordant pathogens in 24 of 27 culture-positive cases and enabled the detection of additional pathogens in 11 patients. The time to result was significantly shorter than with standard culture-based diagnostics (14 vs 35 h), and BJA allowed optimization of therapy in 11 patients. The data show that BJA is a relevant addition to the diagnostic options for joint infections. Limitations result from incomplete detection of relevant pathogens, especially in prosthetic joint infections. The use of BJA in daily practice must therefore be accompanied by diagnostic stewardship measures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Microbiology spectrum
Microbiology spectrum Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Genetics
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
1800
期刊介绍: Microbiology Spectrum publishes commissioned review articles on topics in microbiology representing ten content areas: Archaea; Food Microbiology; Bacterial Genetics, Cell Biology, and Physiology; Clinical Microbiology; Environmental Microbiology and Ecology; Eukaryotic Microbes; Genomics, Computational, and Synthetic Microbiology; Immunology; Pathogenesis; and Virology. Reviews are interrelated, with each review linking to other related content. A large board of Microbiology Spectrum editors aids in the development of topics for potential reviews and in the identification of an editor, or editors, who shepherd each collection.
×
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