{"title":"少急,多快:延迟的血培养负荷会导致不良的培养时间或产量吗?","authors":"Gavin Deas , Fergus Hamilton , Philip Williams","doi":"10.1016/j.jinf.2025.106520","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Blood culture remains a vital diagnostic tool in the acutely unwell patient. The UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations (SMI) stipulate pre-analytical requirements that are aimed at increasing yield and reducing turnaround time. The requirement to load blood cultures on machines within 4 h has been shown to reduce turnaround time but limited evidence exists as to whether it improves yield.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We extracted blood culture results, including organism growth, time to detection, location and time of sample collection from 4 hospitals in Southwest England. We then used mixed effects, Bayesian linear and logistic regression models to examine the effect of predictor variables like time to laboratory (TTL) and sent time on the response variable of growth or time to detection. We fitted generalised additive models to explore non-linearity.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>449,191 culture sets were analysed, 398,077 of which had enough data to include in the final analysis. 37,255 sets flagged positive (9.36%) of which 21,330 were considered pathogens. Our primary analysis identified a small decrease in yield with each hours delay in loading (0.997 (95%CrI 0.994–1.001)). This effect was largest in <em>Streptococcus pneumoniae, agalactiae</em> and <em>pyogenes</em>. In our analysis on time on the machine, culture sets spend 10.03 (95%CrI 12.66–7.31) minutes less on incubators for each hour delay. Neither anaerobes nor yeasts showed any loss of recovery from increasing TTL. There was no convincing non-linearity in either of these effects.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>There is a marginal loss of growth for every hour a blood culture is left unincubated, with the loss of recovery of <em>Streptococcus pyogenes</em> and other streptococci being most common. There was no evidence of a reduction in Gram-negatives, anaerobes, or yeasts. There was a small decrease in time to detection for delayed sets. This analysis suggests there may be marginal benefit in reducing time to load.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50180,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Infection","volume":"91 1","pages":"Article 106520"},"PeriodicalIF":11.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Less haste, more speed: Does delayed blood culture transport time lead to adverse incubation times or yield?\",\"authors\":\"Gavin Deas , Fergus Hamilton , Philip Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jinf.2025.106520\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Blood culture remains a vital diagnostic tool in the acutely unwell patient. The UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations (SMI) stipulate pre-analytical requirements that are aimed at increasing yield and reducing turnaround time. The requirement to load blood cultures on machines within 4 h has been shown to reduce turnaround time but limited evidence exists as to whether it improves yield.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We extracted blood culture results, including organism growth, time to detection, location and time of sample collection from 4 hospitals in Southwest England. We then used mixed effects, Bayesian linear and logistic regression models to examine the effect of predictor variables like time to laboratory (TTL) and sent time on the response variable of growth or time to detection. We fitted generalised additive models to explore non-linearity.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>449,191 culture sets were analysed, 398,077 of which had enough data to include in the final analysis. 37,255 sets flagged positive (9.36%) of which 21,330 were considered pathogens. Our primary analysis identified a small decrease in yield with each hours delay in loading (0.997 (95%CrI 0.994–1.001)). This effect was largest in <em>Streptococcus pneumoniae, agalactiae</em> and <em>pyogenes</em>. In our analysis on time on the machine, culture sets spend 10.03 (95%CrI 12.66–7.31) minutes less on incubators for each hour delay. Neither anaerobes nor yeasts showed any loss of recovery from increasing TTL. There was no convincing non-linearity in either of these effects.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>There is a marginal loss of growth for every hour a blood culture is left unincubated, with the loss of recovery of <em>Streptococcus pyogenes</em> and other streptococci being most common. There was no evidence of a reduction in Gram-negatives, anaerobes, or yeasts. There was a small decrease in time to detection for delayed sets. This analysis suggests there may be marginal benefit in reducing time to load.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Infection\",\"volume\":\"91 1\",\"pages\":\"Article 106520\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":11.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Infection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445325001148\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Infection","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163445325001148","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Less haste, more speed: Does delayed blood culture transport time lead to adverse incubation times or yield?
Background
Blood culture remains a vital diagnostic tool in the acutely unwell patient. The UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations (SMI) stipulate pre-analytical requirements that are aimed at increasing yield and reducing turnaround time. The requirement to load blood cultures on machines within 4 h has been shown to reduce turnaround time but limited evidence exists as to whether it improves yield.
Methods
We extracted blood culture results, including organism growth, time to detection, location and time of sample collection from 4 hospitals in Southwest England. We then used mixed effects, Bayesian linear and logistic regression models to examine the effect of predictor variables like time to laboratory (TTL) and sent time on the response variable of growth or time to detection. We fitted generalised additive models to explore non-linearity.
Results
449,191 culture sets were analysed, 398,077 of which had enough data to include in the final analysis. 37,255 sets flagged positive (9.36%) of which 21,330 were considered pathogens. Our primary analysis identified a small decrease in yield with each hours delay in loading (0.997 (95%CrI 0.994–1.001)). This effect was largest in Streptococcus pneumoniae, agalactiae and pyogenes. In our analysis on time on the machine, culture sets spend 10.03 (95%CrI 12.66–7.31) minutes less on incubators for each hour delay. Neither anaerobes nor yeasts showed any loss of recovery from increasing TTL. There was no convincing non-linearity in either of these effects.
Conclusion
There is a marginal loss of growth for every hour a blood culture is left unincubated, with the loss of recovery of Streptococcus pyogenes and other streptococci being most common. There was no evidence of a reduction in Gram-negatives, anaerobes, or yeasts. There was a small decrease in time to detection for delayed sets. This analysis suggests there may be marginal benefit in reducing time to load.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Infection publishes original papers on all aspects of infection - clinical, microbiological and epidemiological. The Journal seeks to bring together knowledge from all specialties involved in infection research and clinical practice, and present the best work in the ever-changing field of infection.
Each issue brings you Editorials that describe current or controversial topics of interest, high quality Reviews to keep you in touch with the latest developments in specific fields of interest, an Epidemiology section reporting studies in the hospital and the general community, and a lively correspondence section.