Effect of Wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for COVID-19 Treatment on Blood Culture Contamination: Implication for Optimal PPE Strategies.

The personal protective equipment (PPE) used to minimize exposure to hazards can hinder healthcare workers from performing sophisticated procedures. We retrospectively reviewed 77,535 blood cultures (202,012 pairs) performed in 28,502 patients from January 2020 to April 2022. The contamination rate of all blood cultures was significantly elevated in the coronavirus disease 2019 ward at 4.68%, compared to intensive care units at 2.56%, emergency rooms at 1.13%, hematology wards at 1.08%, and general wards at 1.07% (All of P < 0.001). This finding implies that wearing PPE might interfere with adherence to the aseptic technique. Therefore, a new PPE policy is needed that considers the balance between protecting healthcare workers and medical practices.

Unresolved issues in the epidemiology and diagnosis of bacteremia: an opinion paper.

Bacteremia is an important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and, despite the diagnostic and therapeutic advances of the last decades, the evidence supporting many diagnostic aspects of bacteremia is scarce. Information on the epidemiological evolution of this entity is limited and many methodological aspects of blood culture collection and analysis are under discussion. Furthermore, the recommendations of the main scientific societies on many of these aspects are variable and, in many cases, have not been updated recently. In this scenario, we have arranged a series of questions on different aspects of bacteremia and reviewed the literature trying to find proper answers for them. We offer our opinion on the topics where the evidence was weak. The topics covered include epidemiological aspects of bacteremia, indications for blood culture extraction, methods for obtaining and incubating samples, or ways of transmitting results from the microbiology laboratory. We do not intend to summarize the current clinical practice guidelines, nor will we deal with the therapeutic management of this entity. The aim of this paper is to review the current perspective on the diagnosis of bacteremia with a critical approach, to point out the gaps in the literature, to offer the opinion of a team dedicated to infectious diseases and clinical microbiology, and to identify some areas of knowledge on which future studies should focus.

Blood culture utilization and epidemiology of antimicrobial-resistant bloodstream infections before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Indonesian national referral hospital.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding blood culture utilization and antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) infections in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). In addition, there has been a concern for increasing AMR infections among COVID-19 cases in LMICs. Here, we investigated epidemiology of AMR bloodstream infections (BSI) before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Indonesian national referral hospital. METHODS: We evaluated blood culture utilization rate, and proportion and incidence rate of AMR-BSI caused by WHO-defined priority bacteria using routine hospital databases from 2019 to 2020. A patient was classified as a COVID-19 case if their SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR result was positive. The proportion of resistance was defined as the ratio of the number of patients having a positive blood culture for a WHO global priority resistant pathogen per the total number of patients having a positive blood culture for the given pathogen. Poisson regression models were used to assess changes in rate over time. RESULTS: Of 60,228 in-hospital patients, 8,175 had at least one blood culture taken (total 17,819 blood cultures), giving a blood culture utilization rate of 30.6 per 1,000 patient-days. A total of 1,311 patients were COVID-19 cases. Blood culture utilization rate had been increasing before and during the COVID-19 pandemic (both p < 0.001), and was higher among COVID-19 cases than non-COVID-19 cases (43.5 vs. 30.2 per 1,000 patient-days, p < 0.001). The most common pathogens identified were K. pneumoniae (23.3%), Acinetobacter spp. (13.9%) and E. coli (13.1%). The proportion of resistance for each bacterial pathogen was similar between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cases (all p > 0.10). Incidence rate of hospital-origin AMR-BSI increased from 130.1 cases per 100,000 patient-days in 2019 to 165.5 in 2020 (incidence rate ratio 1.016 per month, 95%CI:1.016-1.017, p < 0.001), and was not associated with COVID-19 (p = 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: In our setting, AMR-BSI incidence and etiology were similar between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 cases. Incidence rates of hospital-origin AMR-BSI increased in 2020, which was likely due to increased blood culture utilization. We recommend increasing blood culture utilization and generating AMR surveillance reports in LMICs to inform local health care providers and policy makers.

Rapid Detection of Bacterial and Fungal Pathogens Using the T2MR versus Blood Culture in Patients with Severe COVID-19.

A high rate of bacterial and fungal superinfections was reported in critically ill patients with COVID-19. However, diagnosis can be challenging. The aim of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity and the clinical utility of the point-of-care method T2 magnetic resonance (T2MR) with the gold standard: the blood culture. T2MR can potentially detect five different Candida species and six common bacteria (so-called "ESKAPE" pathogens including Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinet`obacter baumanii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterococcus faecium). If superinfection was suspected in patients with COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit, blood culture and two panels of T2MR were performed. Eighty-five diagnostic bundles were performed in 60 patients in total. T2MR detected an ESKAPE pathogen in 9 out of 85 (10.6%) samples, compared to BC in 3 out of 85 (3.5%). A Candida species was detected in 7 of 85 (8.2%) samples of T2MR compared to 1 out of 85(1.2%) in blood culture. The mean time to positive test result in samples with concordant positive results was 4.5 h with T2MR and 52.5 h with blood culture. The additional use of T2MR enables a highly sensitive and rapid detection of ESKAPE and Candida pathogens. IMPORTANCE Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to a high number of deaths since the beginning of the pandemic worldwide. One of the reasons is the high number of bacterial and fungal superinfections in patients suffering from critical disease. However, diagnosis is often challenging. In this study we could show that the additional use of the culture-independent method T2MR did not only show a much higher detection rate of bacterial and fungal pathogens but also a significantly shorter time until detection and therapy change compared to the gold standard: the blood culture. The implementation of T2MRin the care of patients with severe course of COVID-19 might lead to an earlier sufficient antimicrobial therapy and as a result lower mortality and less use of broad-spectrum unnecessary therapy reducing the risk of resistance development.

Staphylococcus massiliensis isolated from human blood cultures, Germany, 2017-2020.

Clinical and laboratory data on newly described staphylococcal species is rare, which hampers decision-making when such pathogens are detected in clinical specimens. Here, we describe Staphylococcus massiliensis detected in three patients at a university hospital in southwest Germany. We report the discrepancy of microbiological findings between matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry, 16S-rRNA polymerase chain reaction, and whole-genome sequencing for all three isolates. Our findings highlight the diagnostic pitfalls pertinent to novel and non-model organisms in daily microbiological practice, in whom the correct identification is dependent on database accuracy.

Effects of COVID-19 on Blood Culture Contamination at a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center.

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed health care, from increased needs of personal protective equipment (PPE) to overloaded staff and influxes of patients. Blood cultures are frequently used to detect bloodstream infections in critically ill patients, but it is unknown whether the COVID-19 pandemic has had an impact on blood culture contamination rates. A total of 88,332 blood cultures taken over a 33-month period were analyzed to compare blood culture contamination rates before the COVID-19 pandemic to rates during the pandemic. A significant increase in the average number of monthly nurse-drawn and peripherally collected cultures occurred after the start of the pandemic, but there was a decrease in the average number of phlebotomy cultures. A significant increase in contamination rates (P < 0.001) was found in all nonemergency hospital departments during the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing from 2.1% to 2.5%. Increased rates during the COVID-19 pandemic were also found for nursing staff (2.0% to 2.4%) and both peripheral (2.1% to 2.5%) and indwelling line draws (1.1% to 1.7). The number of cultures drawn monthly increased in acute adult departments and both adult and pediatric emergency departments. Blood culture contamination rates in adult acute, adult emergency, and pediatric intensive care units increased after the start of the pandemic by 23%, 75%, and 59%, respectively. A positive correlation was found between blood culture contamination rates and COVID-19 incidence rates. Additional periodic staff training on proper blood collection technique and awareness of the workload of health care workers are recommended to decrease contamination rates during the COVID-19 pandemic. IMPORTANCE Understanding factors that contribute to blood culture contamination is important in order to take steps to limit contamination events. Here, we examine the effect the COVID-19 pandemic has had on blood culture contamination rates and specifically detail the effects based on the staff, draw types, and unit types. The conclusions provided here can be used as hospitals and laboratories navigate the COVID-19 pandemic or other times of high patient volume.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the epidemiology of positive blood cultures in Swiss intensive care units: a nationwide surveillance study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence about the impact of the pandemic of COVID-19 on the incidence rates of blood cultures contaminations and bloodstream infections in intensive care units (ICUs) remains scant. The objective of this study was to investigate the nationwide epidemiology of positive blood cultures drawn in ICUs during the first two pandemic waves of COVID-19 in Switzerland. METHODS: We analyzed data on positive blood cultures among ICU patients, prospectively collected through a nationwide surveillance system (ANRESIS), from March 30, 2020, to May 31, 2021, a 14-month timeframe that included a first wave of COVID-19, which affected the French and Italian-speaking regions, an interim period (summer 2020) and a second wave that affected the entire country. We used the number of ICU patient-days provided by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health as denominator to calculate incidence rates of blood culture contaminations and bloodstream infections (ICU-BSI). Incidence rate ratios comparing the interim period with the second wave were determined by segmented Poisson regression models. RESULTS: A total of 1099 blood culture contaminations and 1616 ICU-BSIs were identified in 52 ICUs during the study. Overall, more episodes of blood culture contaminations and ICU-BSI were observed during the pandemic waves, compared to the interim period. The proportions of blood culture contaminations and ICU-BSI were positively associated with the ICU occupancy rate, which was higher during the COVID-19 waves. During the more representative second wave (versus interim period), we observed an increased incidence of blood culture contaminations (IRR 1.57, 95% CI 1.16-2.12) and ICU-BSI (IRR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03-1.39). CONCLUSIONS: An increase in blood culture contaminations and ICU-BSIs was observed during the second COVID-19 pandemic wave, especially in months when the ICU burden of COVID-19 patients was high.

Increase of blood culture contamination during COVID-19 pandemic. A retrospective descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Secondary bacterial infection during the care of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients poses risks to the patients, but there are concerns of an increase in blood culture contamination. METHODS: A retrospective comparative study was conducted from April 1 to December 31, 2020, when the patients with COVID-19 were taken care of (pandemic period, PP), and it was compared with the same period in 2019 (pre-pandemic period, pre-PP). RESULTS: A total of 346 patients with COVID-19 were hospitalized during the study period in 2020. A total of 1,040 and 918 blood cultures were taken during PPP and PP respectively. 38 and 56 contaminations occurred during pre-PP and PP respectively (3.7% [95% CI 2.6%-5.0%], vs 6.1% [95% CI 4.6%-7.8%], P = .015). For the ICU, 10 and 32 contaminations occurred during the same periods (5.0% [95% CI 2.4%-9.0%], vs 12.5% [95% CI 8.7%-17.1%], P = .0097). True bacteremia in the ICU per patient-day also increased during the PP. CONCLUSIONS: We found a significant increase in blood culture contamination during the COVID-19 pandemic in the ICU setting, while true bacteremia also increased. A safe and effective way to obtain blood cultures from patients with COVID-19 should be sought.

Increased rates of blood culture contamination during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

We observed a higher rate of blood-culture contamination during the COVID-19 pandemic at our institution compared to a prepandemic period. Given the potential implications of blood contamination in antibiotic and diagnostic test utilization as well as added cost, it is imperative to continue efforts to minimize these episodes during the pandemic.

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) response on central-line-associated bloodstream infections and blood culture contamination rates at a tertiary-care center in the Greater Detroit area.

We conducted a comparative retrospective study to quantify the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on patient safety. We found a statistically significant increase in central-line-associated bloodstream infections and blood culture contamination rates during the pandemic. Increased length of stay and mortality were also observed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Few bacterial co-infections but frequent empiric antibiotic use in the early phase of hospitalized patients with COVID-19: results from a multicentre retrospective cohort study in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge on bacterial co-infections in COVID-19 is crucial to use antibiotics appropriately. Therefore, we aimed to determine the incidence of bacterial co-infections, antibiotic use and application of antimicrobial stewardship principles in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study in four hospitals (1 university, 2 non-university teaching, 1 non-teaching hospital) in the Netherlands from March to May 2020 including consecutive patients with PCR-confirmed COVID-19. Data on first microbiological investigations obtained at the discretion of the physician and antibiotic use in the first week of hospital admission were collected. RESULTS: Twelve (1.2%) of the 925 patients included had a documented bacterial co-infection (75.0% pneumonia) within the first week. Microbiological testing was performed in 749 (81%) patients: sputum cultures in 105 (11.4%), blood cultures in 711 (76.9%), pneumococcal urinary antigen testing in 202 (21.8%), and Legionella urinary antigen testing in 199 (21.5%) patients, with clear variation between hospitals. On presentation 556 (60.1%; range 33.3-73.4%) patients received antibiotics for a median duration of 2 days (IQR 1-4). Intravenous to oral switch was performed in 41 of 413 (9.9%) patients who received intravenous treatment >48 h. Mean adherence to the local guideline on empiric antibiotic therapy on day 1 was on average 60.3% (range 45.3%-74.7%). CONCLUSIONS: On presentation to the hospital bacterial co-infections are rare, while empiric antibiotic use is abundant. This implies that in patients with COVID-19 empiric antibiotic should be withheld. This has the potential to dramatically reduce the current overuse of antibiotics in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Usefulness of blood cultures in COVID-19 pneumonia.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has strained the world's health systems, highlighting the need to optimize its clinical management and treatment. The usefulness of blood cultures in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia has not been proved. We aim to describe the diagnostic yield of early blood cultures in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia in a public hospital in Buenos Aires City. This descriptive observational study included all adult patients with COVID-19 pneumonia admitted to the Internal Medicine ward of Hospital Durand between April 1, 2020 and July 30, 2020, who had blood cultures drawn within 5 days from hospital admission. Among 267 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 pneumonia, 38 had early blood cultures drawn. No clinically relevant microorganism was isolated from blood and contaminant microorganisms were recovered in 7 (18.4%) patients. This study found no evidence of bacteremia in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Furthermore, the rate of contaminated blood cultures nearly doubles the reported in patients with community acquired pneumonia (10%), which may be explained by unfamiliarity of additional personal protective equipment worn by healthcare workers. Our results advocate against the routine indication of blood cultures upon admission to the Internal Medicine Ward of patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. We suggest that blood cultures could only be useful in case of clinical deterioration or suspected hospital-acquired infection.

La pandemia por COVID-19 ha puesto en jaque a los sistemas de salud del mundo, priorizando la necesidad de optimizar su manejo clínico. Aunque los protocolos de varios hospitales de nuestro país para COVID-19 incluyen hemocultivo al ingreso, no se ha demostrado su utilidad en pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19. Nuestro objetivo fue describir el rédito diagnóstico de los hemocultivos tempranos en pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19 en un hospital público de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Este estudio observacional descriptivo incluyó todos los pacientes adultos ingresados en la sala de Clínica Médica del Hospital Durand entre el 1 de abril y el 30 de julio de 2020, con neumonía por COVID-19 y hemocultivos realizados dentro de los 5 días del ingreso. De los 267 pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19, a 38 se les realizó hemocultivos tempranos. No se aisló ningún microorganismo clínicamente relevante en ninguno de ellos y se recuperaron microorganismos contaminantes en 7 (18.4%). Este estudio no encontró evidencia de bacteriemia en pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19. Además, la tasa de hemocultivos contaminados casi duplicó la tasa en pacientes con neumonía adquirida en la comunidad, lo que probablemente se deba a la falta de familiaridad de equipos de protección personal adicional utilizado por el personal de salud. Nuestros resultados abogan en contra de la realización rutinaria de hemocultivos al ingreso de pacientes con neumonía por COVID-19. Sugerimos que los hemocultivos solo sean utilizados ante el deterioro clínico o la sospecha de infección intrahospitalaria.

Bacteremia and Blood Culture Utilization during COVID-19 Surge in New York City.

A surge of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) presenting to New York City hospitals in March 2020 led to a sharp increase in blood culture utilization, which overwhelmed the capacity of automated blood culture instruments. We sought to evaluate the utilization and diagnostic yield of blood cultures during the COVID-19 pandemic to determine prevalence and common etiologies of bacteremia and to inform a diagnostic approach to relieve blood culture overutilization. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 88,201 blood cultures from 28,011 patients at a multicenter network of hospitals within New York City to evaluate order volume, positivity rate, time to positivity, and etiologies of positive cultures in COVID-19. Ordering volume increased by 34.8% in the second half of March 2020 compared to the level in the first half of the month. The rate of bacteremia was significantly lower among COVID-19 patients (3.8%) than among COVID-19-negative patients (8.0%) and those not tested (7.1%) (P < 0.001). COVID-19 patients had a high proportion of organisms reflective of commensal skin microbiota, which, when excluded, reduced the bacteremia rate to 1.6%. More than 98% of all positive cultures were detected within 4 days of incubation. Bloodstream infections are very rare for COVID-19 patients, which supports the judicious use of blood cultures in the absence of compelling evidence for bacterial coinfection. Clear communication with ordering providers is necessary to prevent overutilization of blood cultures during patient surges, and laboratories should consider shortening the incubation period from 5 days to 4 days, if necessary, to free additional capacity.

Low prevalence of bloodstream infection and high blood culture contamination rates in patients with COVID-19.

PURPOSE: In the management of COVID-19, knowledge is lacking on the frequency of secondary bacterial infections and on how empirical antibiotic therapy should be used. In the present study, we aimed to compare blood culture (BC) results of a COVID-19 patient cohort with two cohorts of patients without detected COVID-19. METHODS: Using a retrospective cohort study design of patients subjected to BC in six tertiary care hospitals, SARS-CoV-2 positive patients from March 1 to April 30 in 2020 (COVID-19 group) were compared to patients without confirmed SARS-CoV-2 during the same period (control group-2020) and with patients sampled March 1 to April 30 in 2019 (control group-2019). The outcomes studied were proportion of BC positivity, clinically relevant growth, and contaminant growth. RESULTS: In total 15,103 patients and 17,865 BC episodes were studied. Clinically relevant growth was detected in 197/3,027 (6.5%) BC episodes in the COVID-19 group compared to 717/6,663 (10.8%) in control group-2020 (p<0.0001) and 850/8,175 (10.4%) in control group-2019 (p<0.0001). Contamination was present in 255/3,027 (8.4%) BC episodes in the COVID-19 group compared to 330/6,663 (5.0%) in control group-2020 (p<0.0001) and 354/8,175 (4.3%) in control group-2019 (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: In COVID-19 patients, the prevalence of bloodstream bacterial infection is low and the contamination rate of BC is high. This knowledge should influence guidelines regarding blood culture sampling and empirical antibiotic therapy in COVID-19 patients.

Recommendations for antibacterial therapy in adults with COVID-19 - an evidence based guideline.

SCOPE: The Dutch Working Party on Antibiotic Policy constituted a multidisciplinary expert committee to provide evidence-based recommendation for the use of antibacterial therapy in hospitalized adults with a respiratory infection and suspected or proven 2019 Coronavirus disease (COVID-19). METHODS: We performed a literature search to answer four key questions. The committee graded the evidence and developed recommendations by using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology. QUESTIONS ADDRESSED BY THE GUIDELINE AND RECOMMENDATIONS: We assessed evidence on the risk of bacterial infections in hospitalized COVID-19 patients, the associated bacterial pathogens, how to diagnose bacterial infections and how to treat bacterial infections. Bacterial co-infection upon admission was reported in 3.5% of COVID-19 patients, while bacterial secondary infections during hospitalization occurred up to 15%. No or very low quality evidence was found to answer the other key clinical questions. Although the evidence base on bacterial infections in COVID-19 is currently limited, available evidence supports restrictive antibiotic use from an antibiotic stewardship perspective, especially upon admission. To support restrictive antibiotic use, maximum efforts should be undertaken to obtain sputum and blood culture samples as well as pneumococcal urinary antigen testing. We suggest to stop antibiotics in patients who started antibiotic treatment upon admission when representative cultures as well as urinary antigen tests show no signs of involvement of bacterial pathogens after 48 hours. For patients with secondary bacterial respiratory infection we recommend to follow other guideline recommendations on antibacterial treatment for patients with hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia. An antibiotic treatment duration of five days in patients with COVID-19 and suspected bacterial respiratory infection is recommended upon improvement of signs, symptoms and inflammatory markers. Larger, prospective studies about the epidemiology of bacterial infections in COVID-19 are urgently needed to confirm our conclusions and ultimately prevent unnecessary antibiotic use during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Incidence of co-infections and superinfections in hospitalized patients with COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the burden, epidemiology and outcomes of co-infections and superinfections occurring in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: We performed an observational cohort study of all consecutive patients admitted for ≥48 hours to the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona for COVID-19 (28 February to 22 April 2020) who were discharged or dead. We describe demographic, epidemiologic, laboratory and microbiologic results, as well as outcome data retrieved from electronic health records. RESULTS: Of a total of 989 consecutive patients with COVID-19, 72 (7.2%) had 88 other microbiologically confirmed infections: 74 were bacterial, seven fungal and seven viral. Community-acquired co-infection at COVID-19 diagnosis was uncommon (31/989, 3.1%) and mainly caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus. A total of 51 hospital-acquired bacterial superinfections, mostly caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli, were diagnosed in 43 patients (4.7%), with a mean (SD) time from hospital admission to superinfection diagnosis of 10.6 (6.6) days. Overall mortality was 9.8% (97/989). Patients with community-acquired co-infections and hospital-acquired superinfections had worse outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Co-infection at COVID-19 diagnosis is uncommon. Few patients developed superinfections during hospitalization. These findings are different compared to those of other viral pandemics. As it relates to hospitalized patients with COVID-19, such findings could prove essential in defining the role of empiric antimicrobial therapy or stewardship strategies.