Clinical Utilization of DiaSorin Molecular Polymerase Chain Reaction in Pneumocystis Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Pneumocystis jirovecii polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing is a sensitive diagnostic tool but does not distinguish infection from colonization. Cycle threshold (CT) may correlate with fungal burden and could be considered in clinical decision making. Clinical use of PCR and significance of CT values have not previously been examined with the DiaSorin Molecular platform. METHODS: Retrospective review of P jirovecii PCR, CT values and clinical data from 18 months in a multihospital academic health system. The diagnostic performance of PCR with respect to pathology and correlation of CT with severity were examined. RESULTS: Ninety-nine of 1006 (9.8%) assays from 786 patients in 919 encounters were positive. Among 91 (9.9%) encounters in which P jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) was treated, 41 (45%) were influenced by positive PCR. Negative PCR influenced discontinuation of therapy in 35 cases. Sensitivity and specificity of PCR were 93% (95% CI, 68%-100%) and 94% (95% CI, 91%-96%) with respect to pathology. CT values from deep respiratory specimens were significantly different among treated patients (P = .04) and those with positive pathology results (P < .0001) compared to patients not treated and those with negative pathology, respectively, and was highly predictive of positive pathology results (area under the curve = 0.92). No significant difference was observed in comparisons based on indicators of disease severity. CONCLUSIONS: Pneumocystis jirovecii PCR was a highly impactful tool in the diagnosis and management of PJP, and use of CT values may have value in the treatment decision process in select cases. Further investigation in a prospective manner is needed.

Trends in ICU Mortality From Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Tale of Three Surges.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association between time period of hospitalization and hospital mortality among critically ill adults with coronavirus disease 2019. DESIGN: Observational cohort study from March 6, 2020, to January 31, 2021. SETTING: ICUs at four hospitals within an academic health center network in Atlanta, GA. PATIENTS: Adults greater than or equal to 18 years with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to an ICU during the study period (i.e., Surge 1: March to April, Lull 1: May to June, Surge 2: July to August, Lull 2: September to November, Surge 3: December to January). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Among 1,686 patients with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to an ICU during the study period, all-cause hospital mortality was 29.7%. Mortality differed significantly over time: 28.7% in Surge 1, 21.3% in Lull 1, 25.2% in Surge 2, 30.2% in Lull 2, 34.7% in Surge 3 (p = 0.007). Mortality was significantly associated with 1) preexisting risk factors (older age, race, ethnicity, lower body mass index, higher Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, admission from a nursing home); 2) clinical status at ICU admission (higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, higher d-dimer, higher C-reactive protein); and 3) ICU interventions (receipt of mechanical ventilation, vasopressors, renal replacement therapy, inhaled vasodilators). After adjusting for baseline and clinical variables, there was a significantly increased risk of mortality associated with admission during Lull 2 (relative risk, 1.37 [95% CI = 1.03-1.81]) and Surge 3 (relative risk, 1.35 [95% CI = 1.04-1.77]) as compared to Surge 1. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased experience and evidence-based treatments, the risk of death for patients admitted to the ICU with coronavirus disease 2019 was highest during the fall and winter of 2020. Reasons for this increased mortality are not clear.

Sustained decrease in urine culture utilization after implementing a reflex urine culture intervention: A multicenter quasi-experimental study.

Accurately diagnosing urinary tract infections (UTIs) in hospitalized patients remains challenging, requiring correlation of frequently nonspecific symptoms and laboratory findings. Urine cultures (UCs) are often ordered indiscriminately, especially in patients with urinary catheters, despite the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines recommending against routine screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria (ASB).1,2 Positive UCs can be difficult for providers to ignore, leading to unnecessary antibiotic treatment of ASB.2,3 Using diagnostic stewardship to limit UCs to situations with a positive urinalysis (UA) can reduce inappropriate UCs since the absence of pyuria suggests the absence of infection.4-6 We assessed the impact of the implementation of a UA with reflex to UC algorithm ("reflex intervention") on UC ordering practices, diagnostic efficiency, and UTIs using a quasi-experimental design.

Filtering authentic sepsis arising in the ICU using administrative codes coupled to a SIRS screening protocol.

PURPOSE: Using administrative codes and minimal physiologic and laboratory data, we sought a high-specificity identification strategy for patients whose sepsis initially appeared during their ICU stay. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied all patients discharged from an academic hospital between September 1, 2013 and October 31, 2014. Administrative codes and minimal physiologic and laboratory criteria were used to identify patients at high risk of developing the onset of sepsis in the ICU. Two clinicians then independently reviewed the patient record to verify that the screened-in patients appeared to become septic during their ICU admission. RESULTS: Clinical chart review verified sepsis in 437/466 ICU stays (93.8%). Of these 437 encounters, only 151 (34.6%) were admitted to the ICU with neither SIRS nor evidence of infection and therefore appeared to become septic during their ICU stay. CONCLUSIONS: Selected administrative codes coupled to SIRS criteria and applied to patients admitted to ICU can yield up to 94% authentic sepsis patients. However, only 1/3 of patients thus identified appeared to become septic during their ICU stay. Studies that depend on high-intensity monitoring for description of the time course of sepsis require clinician review and verification that sepsis initially appeared during the monitoring period.