Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus screening and eradication in the surgical intensive care unit: Is it worth it?

Utility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screening in patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML)

BACKGROUND

Current literature has demonstrated the utility of the MRSA nasal screen as a de-escalation tool to decrease unnecessary anti-MRSA antibiotic therapy. However, data on the applicability of this test in patients with hematologic malignancy is lacking.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with or without a history of hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT), with pneumonia and MRSA nasal screening with respiratory cultures obtained. The primary outcome was to determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of the MRSA nasal screen for MRSA pneumonia. Secondary outcomes included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) of the MRSA nasal screen and prevalence of MRSA pneumonia.

RESULTS

Of 98 patients with AML and pneumonia, the prevalence of MRSA pneumonia was 4.1% with confirmed positive MRSA respiratory cultures observed in 4 patient cases. In patients with confirmed MRSA pneumonia, 3 had positive MRSA nasal screens while 1 had a false negative result, possibly due to a long lag time (21 days) between MRSA nasal screen and pneumonia diagnosis. Overall, the MRSA nasal screen demonstrated 75% sensitivity and 100% specificity, with a PPV of 100% and a NPV of 98.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the low prevalence, empiric use of anti-MRSA therapy in those AML and HCT patients with pneumonia may not be warranted in clinically stable patients. For patients in whom empiric anti-MRSA antibiotics are initiated, nasal screening for MRSA may be utilized to de-escalate anti-MRSA antibiotics in patients with AML with or without HCT.

The Clinical Utility of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Nasal Screening to Rule Out MRSA Pneumonia: A Diagnostic Meta-analysis With Antimicrobial Stewardship Implications

Background

Recent literature has highlighted methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screening as a possible antimicrobial stewardship program tool for avoiding unnecessary empiric MRSA therapy for pneumonia, yet current guidelines recommend MRSA therapy based on risk factors. The objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic value of MRSA nasal screening in MRSA pneumonia.

Methods

PubMed and EMBASE were searched from inception to November 2016 for English studies evaluating MRSA nasal screening and development of MRSA pneumonia. Data analysis was performed using a bivariate random-effects model to estimate pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV).

Results

Twenty-two studies, comprising 5163 patients, met our inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of MRSA nares screen for all MRSA pneumonia types were 70.9% and 90.3%, respectively. With a 10% prevalence of potential MRSA pneumonia, the calculated PPV was 44.8%, and the NPV was 96.5%. The pooled sensitivity and specificity for MRSA community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and healthcare-associated pneumonia (HCAP) were 85% and 92.1%, respectively. For CAP and HCAP both the PPV and NPV increased, to 56.8% and 98.1%, respectively. In comparison, for MRSA ventilated-associated pneumonia, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 40.3%, 93.7%, 35.7%, and 94.8%, respectively.

Conclusion

Nares screening for MRSA had a high specificity and NPV for ruling out MRSA pneumonia, particularly in cases of CAP/HCAP. Based on the NPV, MRSA nares screening is a valuable tool for AMS to streamline empiric antibiotic therapy, especially among patients with pneumonia who are not colonized with MRSA.

Systematic Review of the Clinical Utility of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Nasal Screening for MRSA Pneumonia

Objective: To describe the diagnostic performance characteristics of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal screening for patients with pneumonia. Data Sources: PubMed and Scopus were searched from 1 January 1990 to 12 December 2018 using terms methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus AND (screening OR active surveillance OR surveillance culture OR targeted surveillance OR chromogenic OR PCR OR polymerase chain reaction OR rapid test) AND (nares OR nasal) AND (pneumonia OR respiratory). Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant studies in humans and English were considered. Data Synthesis: In all, 19 studies, including 21 790 patients, were included. Nasal screening for MRSA had a high negative predictive value (NPV; 76% to 99.4% for relevant studies) across all types of pneumonia. Time from nasal screening to culture varied across studies. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: MRSA nasal screening has a high NPV for MRSA involvement in pneumonia. Utilizing this test for antimicrobial stewardship program (ASP) purposes can provide a valuable tool for reducing unwarranted anti-MRSA agents and may provide additional cost benefits. A cutoff of 7 days between nasal swab and culture or infection onset seems most appropriate for use of this test for anti-MRSA agent de-escalation for ASP purposes. Conclusions: Consideration for the inclusion of the utility of MRSA nasal screening in MRSA pneumonia should be made for future pneumonia and ASP guidelines. Additional studies are warranted to fully evaluate specific pneumonia classifications, culture types, culture timing, and clinical outcomes associated with the use of this test in patients with pneumonia.

Patient safety in the critical care environment

Improving the quality and safety of intensive care unit (ICU) care in the United States is a significant challenge for the future. Obtaining improvement in systems of care is difficult given the reactionary mode physicians tend to enter when dealing with moment-to-moment crises. It will be important to implement quality and safety measures that are already supported by evidence. Improvement of device safety will be critical to reducing the large number of device-related complications that occur in US ICUs. Prospective collection of adverse events with rigorous analysis will be important to allow systematic errors to be exposed and corrected.

Development of a simple, low-density array to detect methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and mecA dropouts in nasal swabs

Detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is important for prevention and control of MRSA infections, but the discovery of mecA dropouts and SCCmec junction sequences with homology to coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) has challenged several real-time PCR tests. The objective of this study was to develop a user-friendly, gel element microarray test for MRSA detection, to estimate the analytical performance characteristics of the test on bacterial isolates, and to perform an initial evaluation of the test on nasopharyngeal swabs from patients known to have a high prevalence of S. aureus containing mecA dropouts. The assay limit of detection for the test was 250 fg (or less) of genomic DNA per amplification reaction (approximately 80 cell equivalents) and MRSA was consistently detected at a ratio of 1:12,000 in a non-target background. Of 87 bacterial isolates, the test accurately classified 86 (98.8%) overall, and correctly identified 14 mecA dropout specimens that were falsely positive in the BD GeneOhm MRSA test or BD GeneOhm StaphSR test. A retrospective analysis of 246 nasal swab samples acquired from a high-risk patient population (overall prevalence=10.8% by culture) resulted in 80.5% sensitivity (95% CI=68.4%, 92.6%) and 96.6% specificity. Of these 246 samples, 174 (71%) were positive for mecA, 86 (35%) were positive for S. aureus tufA and 46 (19%) were positive for a SCCmec junction sequence. To estimate method repeatability, 48 samples representing the full range of phenotypes, genotypes and microarray probe SNR values were tested in triplicate, with three discordant results for a concordance rate of 97.9% (141/144 tests). These data demonstrate that a very simple microarray test can identify mecA dropouts with high specificity in either cultured isolates or nasal swabs from a high-prevalence, high-risk patient population. However, the clinical sensitivity of the test will likely depend on local microbial ecology and the prevalence of mecA positive CoNS in any given patient population.