Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 105(2): 115847, 2022 Nov 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2240682

ABSTRACT

We assessed the diagnostic performance of the Biofire® Filmarray® Pneumonia Plus panel (FA-PP) compared to standard culture in Intensive Care Unit patients with suspected ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infection in the COVID-19 era. We determined whether its implementation in routine diagnostic algorithms would be cost-beneficial from a hospital perspective. Of 163 specimens, 96 (59%) returned negative results with FA-PP and conventional culture, and 29 specimens (17.8%) were positive with both diagnostic methods and yielded concordant qualitative bacterial identification/isolation. Thirty-nine specimens (23.9%) gave discordant results (positive via FA-PP and negative via culture). Real-life adjustments of empirical antimicrobial therapy (EAT) after FA-PP results resulted in additional costs beyond EAT alone of 1868.7 €. Adequate EAT adjustments upon FA-PP results would have resulted in a saving of 6675.8 €. In conclusion, the data presented supports the potential utility of FA-PP for early EAT adjustment in patients with ventilator-associated lower respiratory tract infection.

2.
Int J Infect Dis ; 108: 568-573, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1298674

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the performance of FilmArray Pneumonia Panel Plus (FA-PP) for the detection of typical bacterial pathogens in respiratory samples from patients hospitalized in intensive care units (ICUs). METHODS: FA-PP was implemented for clinical use in the microbiology laboratory in March 2020. A retrospective analysis on a consecutive cohort of adult patients hospitalized in ICUs between March 2020 and May 2020 was undertaken. The respiratory samples included sputum, blind bronchoalveolar lavage (BBAL) and protected specimen brush (PSB). Conventional culture and FA-PP were performed in parallel. RESULTS: In total, 147 samples from 92 patients were analysed; 88% had coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). At least one pathogen was detected in 46% (68/147) of samples by FA-PP and 39% (57/147) of samples by culture. The overall percentage agreement between FA-PP and culture results was 98% (93-100%). Bacteria with semi-quantitative FA-PP results ≥105 copies/mL for PSB samples, ≥106 copies/mL for BBAL samples and ≥107 copies/mL for sputum samples reached clinically significant thresholds for growth in 90%, 100% and 91% of cultures, respectively. FA-PP detected resistance markers, including mecA/C, blaCTX-M and blaVIM. The median turnaround time was significantly shorter for FA-PP than for culture. CONCLUSIONS: FA-PP may constitute a faster approach to the diagnosis of bacterial pneumonia in patients hospitalized in ICUs.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pneumonia, Bacterial , Pneumonia , Adult , Bacteria , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Pneumonia, Bacterial/diagnosis , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 99(1): 115183, 2021 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1023526

ABSTRACT

The FilmArray® Pneumonia Plus (FA-PP) panel can provide rapid identifications and semiquantitative results for many pathogens. We performed a prospective single-center study in 43 critically ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in which we performed 96 FA-PP tests and cultures of blind bronchoalveolar lavage (BBAL). FA-PP detected 1 or more pathogens in 32% (31/96 of samples), whereas culture methods detected at least 1 pathogen in 35% (34/96 of samples). The most prevalent bacteria detected were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 14) and Staphylococcus aureus (n = 11) on both FA-PP and culture. The FA-PP results from BBAL in critically ill patients with COVID-19 were consistent with bacterial culture findings for bacteria present in the FA-PP panel, showing sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of 95%, 99%, 82%, and 100%, respectively. Median turnaround time for FA-PP was 5.5 h, which was significantly shorter than for standard culture (26 h) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing results (57 h).


Subject(s)
Bacteria/isolation & purification , Bacteriological Techniques/methods , COVID-19/complications , Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction/methods , Pneumonia, Bacterial/diagnosis , Aged , Bacteria/classification , Bacteria/genetics , Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid/microbiology , Critical Illness , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia, Bacterial/microbiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Sensitivity and Specificity , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL