Multicenter Evaluation of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia/Pneumonia Plus Panel for Detection and Quantification of Agents of Lower Respiratory Tract Infection

False-positive results for seasonal coronavirus infections on using the FilmArray Pneumonia Panel

The FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (FilmArrayPN; bioMérieux) was tagged for potential false-positive seasonal coronavirus results, possibly caused by non-specific amplification or cross-reactivity with human genomic DNA. This study was conducted to determine the real-world false-positive rate of seasonal coronavirus infections using FilmArrayPN at a tertiary care hospital. We retrospectively reviewed FilmArrayPN results to detect lower respiratory tract pathogens from July 2023 to April 2024. Allplex Respiratory Panel (AllplexRP; Seegene) and/or FilmArray Respiratory Panel (FilmArrayRP) results for the same patient were considered as reference results. In the last month of the study period, all positive samples in FilmArrayPN were confirmed by AllplexRP and pan-coronavirus targeted PCR (pan-CoV PCR). A total of 2,120 specimens, including 1,847 expectorated sputum and 273 bronchial aspirate (BA) samples, were tested by FilmArrayPN. Of these, 161 (8.7%) sputum and 7 (2.6%) BA specimens from 152 patients were positive for coronavirus targets in FilmArrayPN. Of the 122 cases also tested by AllplexRP and/or FilmArrayRP, 106 specimens (86.9%) were coronavirus-negative, except for 9 OC43-positive, 6 229E-positive, and 1 NL63-positive. Notably, 83.1% of the 106 cases that tested negative in the other tests had melting temperatures above 83℃. A total of 61 specimens that tested positive for coronavirus in FilmArrayPN but negative in AllplexRP were confirmed to be negative in pan-CoV PCR. The coronavirus positivity of 7.8% in the FilmArrayPN resulted in 5% of samples being potentially misreported as false-positives. This report thus highlights the need for continuous monitoring of melting temperatures to avoid potential false-positives.

IMPORTANCE

The FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (FilmArrayPN; bioMérieux) was tagged for potential false-positive seasonal coronavirus results, possibly caused by non-specific amplification or cross-reactivity with human genomic DNA. FilmArrayPN results were retrospectively reviewed from July 2023 to May 2024. Of 2,120 tested specimens, 168 specimens from 152 patients were positive for coronavirus targets in FilmArrayPN. Of the 122 cases also tested by Allplex Respiratory Panel and/or FilmArray Respiratory Panel, 106 specimens (86.9%) were coronavirus-negative. Notably, 83.1% of the 106 cases that tested negative in the other tests had melting temperatures above 83℃. A total of 61 specimens that tested positive for coronavirus in FilmArrayPN but negative in Allplex were confirmed to be negative in pan-coronavirus targeted PCR. The coronavirus positivity of 7.8% in the FilmArrayPN resulted in 5% of samples being potentially misreported as false-positives. This report highlights the need for continuous monitoring of melting temperatures to avoid potential false-positives.

Impact of the microscopic quality of endotracheal aspirates on the performance of the Filmarray® pneumonia plus panel in intensive care unit patients with suspected lower respiratory tract infection

PURPOSE

We investigated how the microscopic quality of endotracheal aspirates (ETA) impacts the performance of the Filmarray® pneumonia plus panel (FA-PP) in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation (IMV) with suspicion of lower respiratory tract bacterial infection (LRTBI).

METHODS

The quality of ETA was categorized according to the number of leukocytes and buccal squamous epithelial (BSE)/field (100x magnification). G5 (< 10 BSE cells and > 25 leukocytes/field) and G4 (10-25 BSE cells and > 25 leukocytes/field) ETA were tested in parallel by the FA-PP and conventional semiquantitative culture.

RESULTS

In total, 153 ETA were graded as G5 (from 115 patients) and 56 as G4 (from 48 patients). Focusing on "conventional" bacterial species, a trend towards more positive results (P = 0.16), and co-detections (P = 0.18) was returned by G5 ETA. Although more targets were detected on G5 ETA (P = 0.005), the spectra of bacteria detected was comparable across G5 and G4 specimens. A trend towards higher bacterial burdens as quantitated by the FA-PP, and irrespective of the target, was observed in G5 (median, 106 genome copies/ml) vs. G4 ETA (median, 105 genome copies/ml). The degree of full agreement between FA-PP and culture was higher for G5 ETA (Kappa value, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43-0.66) than for G4 ETA (Kappa value, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.11-0.49). For all bacterial targets detected, genome copy/ml numbers exceeded colony forming units (CFU)/ml counts in 1-2 log10, irrespective of ETA grading. The degree of correlation between genome copies/ml and CFU/ml was slightly better for G5 ETA (Rho = 0.65; P = 0.001) than for G4 ETA (Rho = 0.54; P = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

FA-PP testing of G5 ETA may provide more comprehensive and clinically useful information compared with G4 specimens in patients undergoing IMV with suspected LRTBI and receiving antimicrobial therapy. Yet G4 ETA may still provide useful microbiological information.

Rapid multiplex PCR panel for pneumonia in hospitalised patients with suspected pneumonia in the USA: a single-centre, open-label, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The clinical utility of rapid multiplex respiratory specimen PCR panels for pneumonia for patients with suspected pneumonia is undefined. We aimed to compare the effect of the BioFire FilmArray pneumonia panel (bioMérieux, Salt Lake City, UT, USA) with standard of care testing on antibiotic use in a real-world hospital setting.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, open-label, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Hospitalised patients (aged ≥18 years) with suspected pneumonia, from whom expectorated or induced sputum, tracheal secretions, or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid respiratory culture samples (one per individual) could be collected during index hospitalisation, were eligible for inclusion. Samples from eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) with a computerised tool to undergo testing with either the BioFire FilmArray pneumonia panel, conventional culture, and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (intervention group) or conventional culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing alone (control group). Antimicrobial stewardship review in both groups involved an assessment and recommendations for antibiotic modifications based on clinical data and the results from the BioFire FilmArray pneumonia panel, conventional culture, or both. The primary outcome was median time to first antibiotic modification (ie, escalation or de-escalation of antibiotics against Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria) within 96 h of randomisation, assessed with the Wilcoxon rank-sum test and analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05937126).

FINDINGS

Between Sept 15, 2020, and Sept 19, 2022, 1547 patients were screened for eligibility, of whom 1181 (76·3%) were randomly assigned: 582 (49·3%) to the intervention group and 599 (50·7%) to the control group. In total, 1152 participants were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, 589 (51·1%) in the control group and 563 (48·9%) in the intervention group. For the modified intention-to-treat population, median time to any first antibiotic modification was 20·4 h (95% CI 18·0-20·4) in the intervention group and 25·8 h (22·0-28·7) in the control group (p=0·076). Median time to any antibiotic escalation was 13·8 h (9·2-19·0) in the intervention group and 24·1 h (19·5-29·6) in the control group (p=0·0022). Median time to escalation of antibiotics against Gram-positive organisms was 10·3 h (6·2-30·9) in the intervention group and 24·6 h (19·5-37·2) in the control group (p=0·044); median time to escalation of antibiotics against Gram-negative organisms was 17·3 h (10·8-23·3) in the intervention group and 27·2 h (21·3-33·9) in the control group (p=0·010). Median time to any antibiotic de-escalation did not differ between groups (p=0·37). Median time to first de-escalation of antibiotics against Gram-positive organisms was 20·7 h (17·8-24·0) in the intervention group and 27·8 h (22·9-33·0) in the control group (p=0·015); median time to first de-escalation of antibiotics against Gram-negative organisms did not differ between groups (p=0·46).

INTERPRETATION

Clinical use of the BioFire FilmArray pneumonia panel might lead to faster antibiotic escalations, including for Gram-negative or Gram-positive bacteria, and faster antibiotic de-escalations directed at Gram-positive bacteria. Additional research is needed regarding antimicrobial de-escalation, especially when antibiotics with broad Gram-negative spectrum are being used, by use of rapid diagnostics in patients with lower respiratory tract infection.

FUNDING

bioMérieux.

Respiratory infections in low and middle-income countries

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the epidemiology, aetiology, diagnostics and management of childhood pneumonia in low and middle income countries (LMICs).

DESIGN

Review of published english literature from 2019 to February 2024.

RESULTS

Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) still result in significant mortality in children under 5 years of age in LMICs. Important studies have reported a change in the pathogenesis of LRTIs over the last 5 years with respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) resulting in a large burden of disease. SARS-CoV-2 had a significant direct and indirect impact in children in LMICs. Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MTB) remains a priority pathogen in all children. Nucleic acid amplification and rapid antigen tests have improved diagnostic accuracy for MTB and other bacterial pathogens. Point of care diagnostics may overcome some limitations, but there is a need for better cost-effective diagnostics. Access to shorter courses of TB treatment are now recommended for some children, but child friendly formulations are lacking. The role of chest X-ray in TB has been recognized and included in guidelines, and lung ultrasound to diagnose LRTI is showing promise as a lower cost and accessible option.

CONCLUSION

Advances in diagnostics and large multi-centre studies have provided increased understanding of the causative pathogens of LRTIs in LMICs. Increased access to preventive strategies such as vaccines, treatment modalities including antivirals, and addressing upstream factors such as poverty are essential if further declines in LRTIs in LMICs are to be realised.

Bacteriological Profile of Nosocomial Pneumonia and Current State of Antibiotic Resistance in the Military Hospital of Avicenne

This retrospective study, conducted over five years, aimed to assess the bacteriological profile of nosocomial pneumonia, the antibiotic resistance of isolated bacteria, and changes in these parameters over time. The analysis reviewed 660 samples from the microbiology department at the Military Hospital of Avicenne in Marrakech, Morocco, covering the period from January 1, 2017, to December 31, 2021. Among these samples, 303 microorganisms were identified from 251 specimens, confirming diagnoses of nosocomial pneumonia. Microorganism identification and antibiograms were performed using the Phoenix100 automated system from Becton Dickinson. The results revealed that 73% of the isolated microorganisms were Gram-negative bacilli, with Acinetobacter baumannii (29.4%) being the most common, followed by Enterobacteriaceae (28%), particularly Klebsiella pneumoniae (15.5%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (10.9%). Gram-positive cocci made up 22.5% of isolates, with Staphylococcus aureus (15.2%) being the most prevalent, while yeasts were present in 3.6% of cases. A polymicrobial nature was observed in 19.12% of samples. A. baumannii strains showed high resistance to most antibiotics, with an imipenem resistance rate of 88.5%; colistin was the only effective agent against these strains. In contrast, P. aeruginosa exhibited broad sensitivity to antibiotics, with only an 11.1% resistance rate to ceftazidime and good sensitivity to imipenem (80%). Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase production was noted in 11.5% of Enterobacteriaceae, mainly K. pneumoniae. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus prevalence was low at 11.6%, and all S. aureus strains were vancomycin-sensitive. The study highlights the importance of prudent antibiotic use, enhanced hospital hygiene practices, and ongoing monitoring of bacterial resistance. These measures are vital for developing therapeutic strategies suited to local epidemiology and reducing infections caused by multidrug-resistant microorganisms.

Guidelines for Antibiotics Prescription in Critically Ill Patients

How to cite this article: Khilnani GC, Tiwari P, Mittal S, Kulkarni AP, Chaudhry D, Zirpe KG, et al. Guidelines for Antibiotics Prescription in Critically Ill Patients. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(S2):S104-S216.

Clinical challenge of diagnosing non-ventilator hospital-acquired pneumonia and identifying causative pathogens: a narrative review

Non-ventilated hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP) is associated with a significant healthcare burden, arising from high incidence and associated morbidity and mortality. However, accurate identification of cases remains challenging. At present, there is no gold-standard test for the diagnosis of NV-HAP, requiring instead the blending of non-specific signs and investigations. Causative organisms are only identified in a minority of cases. This has significant implications for surveillance, patient outcomes and antimicrobial stewardship. Much of the existing research in HAP has been conducted among ventilated patients. The paucity of dedicated NV-HAP research means that conclusions regarding diagnostic methods, pathology and interventions must largely be extrapolated from work in other settings. Progress is also limited by the lack of a widely agreed definition for NV-HAP. The diagnosis of NV-HAP has large scope for improvement. Consensus regarding a case definition will allow meaningful research to improve understanding of its aetiology and the heterogeneity of outcomes experienced by patients. There is potential to optimize the role of imaging and to incorporate novel techniques to identify likely causative pathogens. This would facilitate both antimicrobial stewardship and surveillance of an important healthcare-associated infection. This narrative review considers the utility of existing methods to diagnose NV-HAP, with a focus on the significance and challenge of identifying pathogens. It discusses the limitations in current techniques, and explores the potential of emergent molecular techniques to improve microbiological diagnosis and outcomes for patients.

The Impact of Next-Generation Sequencing Added to Multiplex PCR on Antibiotic Stewardship in Critically Ill Patients with Suspected Pneumonia

INTRODUCTION

In patients with suspected pneumonia who are tested with respiratory culture and multiplex PCR, the potential added benefit of next-generation sequencing technologies is unknown.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study in which residual bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens were retrieved from hospitalized patients. We compared its research-use-only Respiratory Pathogen Illumina Panel (RPIP) results to culture and BioFire® FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BioFire® PN) results from critically ill patients.

RESULTS

In total, 47 BAL specimens from 47 unique patients were included. All BAL samples were tested with culture and multiplex PCR. In total, 38 of the 47 BALs were consistent with a clinical picture of pneumonia per chart review. Additional testing of the 38 samples with the RPIP identified a new bacterium in 20 patients, a new virus in 4 patients, a new bacterium plus virus in 4 patients, and no additional organisms in 10 patients. In 17 (44.5%) of these patients, the RPIP results could have indicated an antibiotic addition. Compared with cultures, the RPIP had an overall sensitivity of 64% and specificity of 98%, with a 0% sensitivity for fungus and 14% sensitivity for mycobacteria. Compared with BioFire® PN, the RPIP was 70% sensitive and 99% specific, with a 74% sensitivity for bacteria and 33% sensitivity for viruses. The RPIP was 29% more sensitive for HAP/VAP bacterial targets compared with CAP.

CONCLUSIONS

Emerging NGS technologies such as the RPIP may have a role in identifying the etiology of pneumonia, even when patients have BAL culture and multiplex PCR results available. Similar to prior studies evaluating RPIP, our study showed this platform lacked sensitivity when compared with cultures, particularly for fungi and mycobacteria. However, the high specificity of the test can be leveraged when clinicians are seeking to rule out certain infections.

Utility of a multiplex pathogen detection system directly from respiratory specimens for treatment and diagnostic stewardship

The availability of syndrome-based panels for various ailments has widened the scope of diagnostics in many clinical settings. These panels can detect a multitude of pathogens responsible for a particular condition, which can lead to a timely diagnosis and better treatment outcomes. In contrast to traditional identification methods based on pathogen growth on culture, syndrome-based panels offer a quicker diagnosis, which can be especially beneficial in situations requiring urgent care, such as intensive care units. One such panel is the Biofire Filmarray Pneumonia plus Panel (BFP), which we have compared against microbiological culture and identification. The lower respiratory samples from patients were tested with BFP, culture, and identification with culture considered the gold standard. The phenotypic antibiotic susceptibility results (Vitek 2) were compared with the antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes detected in BFP. Statistical analysis was carried out using GraphPad 7.0 and MS Excel (Microsoft Inc.). The results showed a positive percent agreement of 100% and a negative percent agreement of 47.8% with an overall agreement of 76.72% compared to culture. BFP was better at identifying fastidious bacteria, and the agreement with culture was higher for high bacterial identification numbers (107 and 106). There was also a correlation between the number of pathogens detected and growth in culture. Carbapenemase genes were detected in around 80% of phenotypically resistant samples and correlated with in-house PCR 60% of the time. Hence, BFP results need to be interpreted with caution especially when multiple pathogens are detected. Similarly, the presence or absence of AMR genes should be used to guide the therapy while being watchful of unusual resistance or susceptibility. The cost constraints and low throughput call for patient selection criteria and prioritization in emergency or resource-limited conditions.IMPORTANCEApplication of syndrome-based panels in clinical microbiology is of huge support in infectious conditions requiring urgent interventions, such as pneumonia. Interpreting the results requires caution; hence, we have compared the results obtained from Biofire Filmarray Pneumonia plus Panel with standard microbiological methods.

Comparative performance of biofire pneumonia panel and standard culture-based methods for diagnosing pneumonia in critically ill patients: Impact on antibiotic stewardship

INTRODUCTION

Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) are a common cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Accurate identification of the pathogens causing LRTIs is crucial for ensuring of diagnostic and antibiotic stewardship. The Biofire Pneumonia Panel (BFPP) is a molecular diagnostic test that allows rapid detection of various bacterial and viral pathogens. In this study, we compared the performance of BFPP with standard culture methods for the detection of pathogens.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Respiratory samples from 70 patient with suspected LRTIs were tested using both BFPP and standard culture methods. The distribution of isolated bacterial pathogens was analyzed, and the sensitivity and specificity of BFPP were calculated. Additionally, the performance of BFPP in detecting antimicrobial resistance genes was evaluated. The results were compared with those obtained from VITEK-2 antimicrobial susceptibility testing and culture-based methods.

RESULTS

Among the suspected LRTI cases, BFPP identified a single pathogen in 32.8% of cases and multiple pathogens in 40% of cases. The standard culture method detected a single pathogen in 47.1% of cases. BFPP showed a sensitivity of 93.9% and a specificity of 45.9% for the total sample. The performance of BFPP in detecting antimicrobial resistance genes varied for different pathogens with overall sensitivity of 40.1% and specificity of 95.9%.

CONCLUSION

The Biofire Pneumonia Panel (BFPP) demonstrated high sensitivity for several bacterial pathogens, indicating its potential as a rapid diagnostic tool. However, its performance varied for different microorganisms, and it had limitations in detecting certain pathogens and antimicrobial resistance genes for which still required more further studies to explore different resistance gene mechanism that can be incorporated in this panel in future. The BFPP can complement standard culture methods as a rapid tool in the diagnosis of LRTIs.

Breaking Boundaries in Pneumonia Diagnostics: Transitioning from Tradition to Molecular Frontiers with Multiplex PCR

The advent of rapid molecular microbiology testing has revolutionized infectious disease diagnostics and is now impacting pneumonia diagnosis and management. Molecular platforms offer highly multiplexed assays for diverse viral and bacterial detection, alongside antimicrobial resistance markers, providing the potential to significantly shape patient care. Despite the superiority in sensitivity and speed, debates continue regarding the clinical role of multiplex molecular testing, notably in comparison to standard methods and distinguishing colonization from infection. Recent guidelines endorse molecular pneumonia panels for enhanced sensitivity and rapidity, but implementation requires addressing methodological differences and ensuring clinical relevance. Diagnostic stewardship should be leveraged to optimize pneumonia testing, emphasizing pre- and post-analytical strategies. Collaboration between clinical microbiologists and bedside providers is essential in developing implementation strategies to maximize the clinical utility of multiplex molecular diagnostics in pneumonia. This narrative review explores these multifaceted issues, examining the current evidence on the clinical performance of multiplex molecular assays in pneumonia, and reflects on lessons learned from previous microbiological advances. Additionally, given the complexity of pneumonia and the sensitivity of molecular diagnostics, diagnostic stewardship is discussed within the context of current literature, including implementation strategies that consider pre-analytical and post-analytical modifications to optimize the clinical utility of advanced technologies like multiplex PCR.

New Guidelines for Severe Community-acquired Pneumonia

In 2023, the new European guidelines on severe community-acquired pneumonia, providing clinical practice recommendations for the management of this life-threatening infection, characterized by a high burden of mortality, morbidity, and costs for the society. This review article aims to summarize the principal evidence related to eight different questions covered in the guidelines, by also highlighting the future perspectives for research activity.

Antibiotic Strategies for Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia

Despite advancements in health systems and intensive care unit (ICU) care, along with the introduction of novel antibiotics and microbiologic techniques, mortality rates in severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) patients have not shown significant improvement. Delayed admission to the ICU is a major risk factor for higher mortality. Apart from choosing the appropriate site of care, prompt and appropriate antibiotic therapy significantly affects the prognosis of sCAP. Treatment regimens involving ceftaroline or ceftobiprole are currently considered the best options for managing patients with sCAP. Additionally, several other molecules, such as delafloxacin, lefamulin, and omadacycline, hold promise as therapeutic strategies for sCAP. This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of the key challenges in managing adults with severe CAP, focusing on essential aspects related to antibiotic treatment and investigating potential strategies to enhance clinical outcomes in sCAP patients.

Combined multiplex panel test results are a poor estimate of disease prevalence without adjustment for test error

Multiplex panel tests identify many individual pathogens at once, using a set of component tests. In some panels the number of components can be large. If the panel is detecting causative pathogens for a single syndrome or disease then we might estimate the burden of that disease by combining the results of the panel, for example determining the prevalence of pneumococcal pneumonia as caused by many individual pneumococcal serotypes. When we are dealing with multiplex test panels with many components, test error in the individual components of a panel, even when present at very low levels, can cause significant overall error. Uncertainty in the sensitivity and specificity of the individual tests, and statistical fluctuations in the numbers of false positives and false negatives, will cause large uncertainty in the combined estimates of disease prevalence. In many cases this can be a source of significant bias. In this paper we develop a mathematical framework to characterise this issue, we determine expressions for the sensitivity and specificity of panel tests. In this we identify a counter-intuitive relationship between panel test sensitivity and disease prevalence that means panel tests become more sensitive as prevalence increases. We present novel statistical methods that adjust for bias and quantify uncertainty in prevalence estimates from panel tests, and use simulations to test these methods. As multiplex testing becomes more commonly used for screening in routine clinical practice, accumulation of test error due to the combination of large numbers of test results needs to be identified and corrected for.

Impact of FilmArray respiratory panel test for hospitalized pediatric respiratory tract infection in Taiwan: A 3-year single-center cohort study

Respiratory tract infections are prevalent and clinically significant in pediatric populations globally. However, pathogen testing often involves time-consuming processes, resulting in delays in diagnosis. To date, commercial testing machines, such as the FilmArray respiratory panel, have been proposed for hospitals. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the impact of the FilmArray respiratory panel at a single center. This study utilized the medical records of our hospital to select pediatric inpatients with respiratory tract infections who underwent the FilmArray respiratory panel between September 2020 and April 2021 and those who did not undergo nucleic acid detection (a rapid test group) between September 2019 and April 2020. FilmArray is a polymerase chain reaction-based diagnostic tool. The FilmArray respiratory panel group was scheduled to recruit 150 patients (final 137 patients), whereas the rapid test group was scheduled to recruit 300 patients (final 267 patients). Differences in continuous variables between the 2 groups were analyzed using independent Student t tests. The FilmArray respiratory panel group had a longer length of inpatient days, longer duration of antibiotic use, and higher proportion of pathogens that tested positive, with significant differences than those in the rapid test group. Fever duration showed no significant difference between the 2 groups. For the polymerase chain reaction method, respiratory syncytial virus was the most commonly detected pathogen causing pneumonia, followed by human rhinovirus/enterovirus and parainfluenza virus. Mycoplasma was detected using the rapid test but not with the FilmArray respiratory panel. The FilmArray respiratory panel provides clinicians with a rapid and useful diagnostic tool. The effect was quite good for virus detection, but not for bacteria. Given its limited adoption, the tool may not aid clinicians in the diagnosis of mild cases.

Practice Versus Potential: The Impact of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel on Antibiotic Use in Children

BACKGROUND

The BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BFPP), a multiplex PCR panel for the diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infections, has been proposed as a tool for antimicrobial stewardship. Few studies evaluate real-world implementation of the BFPP and no studies focus exclusively on children. Our institution implemented BFPP testing without restrictions.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in children hospitalized at St. Louis Children's Hospital to (1) characterize the use of the BFPP in pediatric patients and (2) assess how results impacted antibiotic use. We included all BFPP tests obtained during the first year after the introduction of the test, September 2021 through August 2022. The primary outcome was change in antibiotic therapy within 24 hours of results, which was compared to the potential change in antibiotic therapy determined by two infectious diseases clinicians.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-nine tests from 126 patients were included. Nine patients were immunocompromised and 19 had chronic tracheostomy. The majority of tests were sent from tracheal aspirate specimens (92%) and from patients in an intensive care unit (94%). Only 51% of tests were obtained due to respiratory failure or suspected pneumonia. For 80% of test results, there was potential to change antibiotics, but change occurred in only 46% of tests in practice. Antibiotic escalation was more common (26%) than de-escalation (15%) or discontinuation (4.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of pediatric patients tested with the BFPP, the majority of tests were sent from tracheal aspirates and less than half of tests were associated with a change in antibiotics.

Bacterial Infections in Intensive Care Units: Epidemiological and Microbiological Aspects

Intensive care units constitute a critical setting for the management of infections. The patients' fragilities and spread of multidrug-resistant microorganisms lead to relevant difficulties in the patients' care. Recent epidemiological surveys documented the Gram-negative bacteria supremacy among intensive care unit (ICU) infection aetiologies, accounting for numerous multidrug-resistant isolates. Regarding this specific setting, clinical microbiology support holds a crucial role in the definition of diagnostic algorithms. Eventually, the complete patient evaluation requires integrating local epidemiological knowledge into the best practice and the standardization of antimicrobial stewardship programs. Clinical laboratories usually receive respiratory tract and blood samples from ICU patients, which express a significant predisposition to severe infections. Therefore, conventional or rapid diagnostic workflows should be modified depending on patients' urgency and preliminary colonization data. Additionally, it is essential to complete each microbiological report with rapid phenotypic minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values and information about resistance markers. Microbiologists also help in the eventual integration of ultimate genome analysis techniques into complicated diagnostic workflows. Herein, we want to emphasize the role of the microbiologist in the decisional process of critical patient management.

Diagnostic Stewardship for Multiplex Respiratory Testing: What We Know and What Needs to Be Done

Syndromic respiratory panels are now widely available in clinical microbiology laboratories and health care institutions. These panels can rapidly diagnose infections and detect antimicrobial resistance genes allowing for more rapid therapeutic optimization compared to standard microbiology approaches. However, given reimbursement concerns and limitations of multiplex molecular testing and results interpretation, maximum clinical utility and positive clinical outcomes depend on active diagnostic stewardship. Here, the authors review clinical outcomes of both upper and lower respiratory panels and present diagnostic stewardship strategies for optimal use of respiratory panels.

Development and validation of multiplex real-time PCR for simultaneous detection of six bacterial pathogens causing lower respiratory tract infections and antimicrobial resistance genes

BACKGROUND

Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Streptococcus pneumoniae and Staphylococcus aureus are major bacterial causes of lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) globally, leading to substantial morbidity and mortality. The rapid increase of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in these pathogens poses significant challenges for their effective antibiotic therapy. In low-resourced settings, patients with LRTIs are prescribed antibiotics empirically while awaiting several days for culture results. Rapid pathogen and AMR gene detection could prompt optimal antibiotic use and improve outcomes.

METHODS

Here, we developed multiplex quantitative real-time PCR using EvaGreen dye and melting curve analysis to rapidly identify six major pathogens and fourteen AMR genes directly from respiratory samples. The reproducibility, linearity, limit of detection (LOD) of real-time PCR assays for pathogen detection were evaluated using DNA control mixes and spiked tracheal aspirate. The performance of RT-PCR assays was subsequently compared with the gold standard, conventional culture on 50 tracheal aspirate and sputum specimens of ICU patients.

RESULTS

The sensitivity of RT-PCR assays was 100% for K. pneumoniae, A. baumannii, P. aeruginosa, E. coli and 63.6% for S. aureus and the specificity ranged from 87.5% to 97.6%. The kappa correlation values of all pathogens between the two methods varied from 0.63 to 0.95. The limit of detection of target bacteria was 1600 CFU/ml. The quantitative results from the PCR assays demonstrated 100% concordance with quantitative culture of tracheal aspirates. Compared to culture, PCR assays exhibited higher sensitivity in detecting mixed infections and S. pneumoniae. There was a high level of concordance between the detection of AMR gene and AMR phenotype in single infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multiplex quantitative RT-PCR assays are fast and simple, but sensitive and specific in detecting six bacterial pathogens of LRTIs and their antimicrobial resistance genes and should be further evaluated for clinical utility.

Evaluation of the clinical relevance of the Biofire© FilmArray pneumonia panel among hospitalized patients

PURPOSE

Panel PCR tests provide rapid pathogen identification. However, their diagnostic performance is unclear. We assessed the performance of the Biofire© FilmArray pneumonia (PN)-panel against standard culture in broncho-alveolar lavage (BAL) samples.

METHODS

Setting: University Hospital Basel (February 2019 to July 2020), including hospitalized patients with a BAL (± pneumonia). We determined sensitivity and specificity of the PN-panel against standard culture. Using univariate logistic regression, we calculated odds ratios (OR) for pneumonia according to PN-panel and culture status, stratifying by chronic pulmonary disease. We calculated ORs for pneumonia for different pathogens to estimate the clinical relevance.

RESULTS

We included 840 adult patients, 60% were males, median age was 68 years, 35% had chronic pulmonary disease, 21% had pneumonia, and 36% had recent antibiotic use. In 1078 BAL samples, bacterial pathogens were detected in 36% and 16% with PN-panel and culture, respectively. The overall sensitivity and specificity of the PN-panel was high, whereas the positive predictive value was low. The OR of pneumonia was 1.1 (95% CI 0.7-1.6) for PN-panel-positive only; 2.6 (95% CI 1.3-5.3) for culture-positive only, and 1.6 (95% CI 1.0-2.4) for PN-panel and culture-positive. The detection rate of Haemophilus influenzae, Staphylococcus aureus, and Moraxella catarrhalis in the PN-panel was high but not associated with pneumonia.

CONCLUSION

While sensitivity and specificity of PN-panel are high compared to culture, pathogen detection did not correlate well with a pneumonia diagnosis. Patients with culture-positive BAL had the highest OR for pneumonia-thus the impact of the PN-panel on clinical management needs further evaluation in randomized controlled trials.

Community-acquired pneumonia in children: updated perspectives on its etiology, diagnosis, and treatment

Pneumonia is a common pediatric infectious disease that is familiar to pediatricians and a major cause of hospitalization worldwide. Recent well-designed epidemiologic studies in developed countries indicated that respiratory viruses are detected in 30%-70%, atypical bacteria in 7%-17%, and pyogenic bacteria in 2%-8% of children hospitalized with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The etiological distribution of CAP varies widely by child age and the epidemiological season of the respiratory pathogen. Moreover, diagnostic tests, particularly for the detection of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Mycoplasma pneumoniae, the 2 major bacterial pathogens involved in pediatric CAP, have several limitations. Therefore, management and empirical antimicrobial therapy for children with CAP should be applied in a stepwise manner based on recent epidemiological, etiological, and microbiological evidence.

Impact of Multiplex PCR in the Therapeutic Management of Severe Bacterial Pneumonia

Pneumonia is a common and severe illness that requires prompt and effective management. Advanced, rapid, and accurate tools are needed to diagnose patients with severe bacterial pneumonia, and to rapidly select appropriate antimicrobial therapy, which must be initiated within the first few hours of care. Two multiplex molecular tests, Unyvero HPN and FilmArray Pneumonia+ Panel, have been developed using the multiplex polymerase chain reaction (mPCR) technique to rapidly identify pathogens and their main antibiotic resistance mechanisms from patient respiratory specimens. Performance evaluation of these tests showed strong correlations with reference techniques. However, good knowledge of their indications, targets, and limitations is essential. Collaboration with microbiologists is, therefore, crucial for their appropriate use. Under these conditions, and with standardized management, these rapid tests can improve the therapeutic management of severe pneumonia faster, more precisely, and with narrow-spectrum antibiotic therapy. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to address the many unanswered questions about multiplex rapid molecular testing during the diagnosis and the management of severe pneumonia. This narrative review will address the current knowledge, advantages, and disadvantages of these tests, and propose solutions for their routine use.

Real-life Assessment of BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel in Adults Hospitalized With Respiratory Illness

BACKGROUND

Inability to identify the microbial etiology of lower respiratory tract infection leads to unnecessary antibiotic use. We evaluated the utility of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BioFire PN) to inform microbiologic diagnosis.

METHODS

Hospitalized adults with respiratory illness were recruited; sputa and clinical/laboratory data were collected. Sputa were cultured for bacteria and tested with BioFire PN. Microbial etiology was adjudicated by 4 physicians. Bacterial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was compared with culture and clinical adjudication.

RESULTS

Of 298 sputa tested, BioFire PN detected significantly more pathogens (350 bacteria, 16 atypicals, and 164 viruses) than sputum culture plus any standard-of-care testing (91% vs 60%, P < .0001). When compared with culture, the sensitivity of BioFire PN for individual bacteria was 46% to 100%; specificity, 61% to 100%; and negative predictive value, 92% to 100%. Cases were adjudicated as viral (n = 58) and bacterial (n = 100). PCR detected bacteria in 55% of viral cases and 95% of bacterial (P < .0001). High serum procalcitonin and bacterial adjudication were more often associated with sputa with 106 or 107 copies detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiplex PCR testing of sputa for bacteria is useful to rule out bacterial infection with added value to detect viruses and atypical bacteria.

Quantitatively assessing early detection strategies for mitigating COVID-19 and future pandemics

Researchers and policymakers have proposed systems to detect novel pathogens earlier than existing surveillance systems by monitoring samples from hospital patients, wastewater, and air travel, in order to mitigate future pandemics. How much benefit would such systems offer? We developed, empirically validated, and mathematically characterized a quantitative model that simulates disease spread and detection time for any given disease and detection system. We find that hospital monitoring could have detected COVID-19 in Wuhan 0.4 weeks earlier than it was actually discovered, at 2,300 cases (standard error: 76 cases) compared to 3,400 (standard error: 161 cases). Wastewater monitoring would not have accelerated COVID-19 detection in Wuhan, but provides benefit in smaller catchments and for asymptomatic or long-incubation diseases like polio or HIV/AIDS. Air travel monitoring does not accelerate outbreak detection in most scenarios we evaluated. In sum, early detection systems can substantially mitigate some future pandemics, but would not have changed the course of COVID-19.

Rapid Detection of Antimicrobial Resistance Genes in Critically Ill Children Using a Custom TaqMan Array Card

Bacteria are identified in only 22% of critically ill children with respiratory infections treated with antimicrobial therapy. Once an organism is isolated, antimicrobial susceptibility results (phenotypic testing) can take another day. A rapid diagnostic test identifying antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes could help clinicians make earlier, informed antimicrobial decisions. Here we aimed to validate a custom AMR gene TaqMan Array Card (AMR-TAC) for the first time and assess its feasibility as a screening tool in critically ill children. An AMR-TAC was developed using a combination of commercial and bespoke targets capable of detecting 23 AMR genes. This was validated using isolates with known phenotypic resistance. The card was then tested on lower respiratory tract and faecal samples obtained from mechanically ventilated children in a single-centre observational study of respiratory infection. There were 82 children with samples available, with a median age of 1.2 years. Major comorbidity was present in 29 (35%) children. A bacterial respiratory pathogen was identified in 13/82 (16%) of children, of which 4/13 (31%) had phenotypic AMR. One AMR gene was detected in 49/82 (60%), and multiple AMR genes were detected in 14/82 (17%) children. Most AMR gene detections were not associated with the identification of phenotypic AMR. AMR genes are commonly detected in samples collected from mechanically ventilated children with suspected respiratory infections. AMR-TAC may have a role as an adjunct test in selected children in whom there is a high suspicion of antimicrobial treatment failure.

Exploring the Utility of Multiplex Infectious Disease Panel Testing for Diagnosis of Infection in Different Body Sites: A Joint Report of the Association for Molecular Pathology, American Society for Microbiology, Infectious Diseases Society of America, and Pan American Society for Clinical Virology

The use of clinical molecular diagnostic methods for detecting microbial pathogens continues to expand and, in some cases, supplant conventional identification methods in various scenarios. Analytical and clinical benefits of multiplex molecular panels for the detection of respiratory pathogens have been demonstrated in various studies. The use of these panels in managing different patient populations has been incorporated into clinical guidance documents. The Association for Molecular Pathology's Infectious Diseases Multiplex Working Group conducted a review of the current benefits and challenges to using multiplex PCR for the detection of pathogens from gastrointestinal tract, central nervous system, lower respiratory tract, and joint specimens. The Working Group also discusses future directions and novel approaches to detection of pathogens in alternate specimen types, and outlines challenges associated with implementation of these multiplex PCR panels.

Performance evaluation of a PCR panel (FilmArray® Pneumonia Plus) for detection of respiratory bacterial pathogens in respiratory specimens: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Accuracy and timing of antibiotic therapy remain a challenge for lower respiratory tract infections. New molecular techniques using Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction, including the FilmArray® Pneumonia Plus Panel [FAPP], have been developed to address this. The aim of this study is to evaluate the FAPP diagnostic performance for the detection of the 15 typical bacteria of the panel from respiratory samples in a meta-analysis from a systematic review.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and EMBASE from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2022, and selected any study on the FAPP diagnostic performance on respiratory samples compared to the reference standard, bacterial culture. The main outcome was the overall diagnostic accuracy with sensitivity and specificity. We calculated the log Diagnostic Odds Ratio and analyzed performance for separate bacteria, antimicrobial resistance genes, and according to the sample type. We also reported the FAPP turnaround time and the out-of-panel bacteria number and species. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021226280).

RESULTS

From 10 317 records, we identified 30 studies including 8 968 samples. Twenty-one were related to intensive care. The overall sensitivity and specificity were 94% [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 91-95] and 98% [95%CI 97-98], respectively. The log Diagnostic Odds Ratio was 6.35 [95%CI 6.05-6.65]. 9.3% [95%CI 9.2-9.5] of bacteria detected in culture were not included in the FAPP panel.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review reporting the FAPP evaluation revealed a high accuracy. This test may represent an adjunct tool for pulmonary bacterial infection diagnostic and antimicrobial stewardship. Further evidence is needed to assess the impact on clinical outcome.

Evaluation of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia plus Panel for Detecting Bacterial Etiological Agents of Lower Respiratory Tract Infections in an Oncologic Hospital. Comparison with Conventional Culture Method

Conventional methods used to determine pneumonia pathogens are characterized by low sensitivity and long turnaround times. Introducing new tests with better parameters in patients at higher risk of infections is highly anticipated. The results of the conventional quantitative culture method (CM) in determining the bacterial etiology of pneumonia were compared with the results of the Pneumonia plus Panel test (PNP; BioFire® Diagnostics, USA) in 79 samples of bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL). Materials were collected from 79 patients with suspected pneumonia treated in an oncologic hospital due to solid tumors. Only 16/79 BAL samples (20.3%) were true positive (TP) for bacterial etiology in CM vs. 27/79 samples (34.2%) true positive in the PNP test. The total agreement between methods of interpreting the result (positive or negative) was 84.8%. The most prevalent pathogens in both methods were Staphylococcus aureus, followed by Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Haemophilus influenzae. The PNP test identified several respiratory pathogens that were not grown in culture. The semiquantitative value reported by the PNP test was higher than that reported by culture. The PNP test vs. combined test (PNP test and CM methods) demonstrated positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) values of 100.0% and 98.1%, and the sensitivity and specificity were 96.4% and 100.0%. The PNP test is a good tool for determining the etiology of bacterial pneumonia and may support the care of an oncologic patient. However, further large-sample studies are needed to research in strictly defined groups of oncologic patients.

Performance and Impact on Antibiotic Prescriptions of a Multiplex PCR in a Real-Life Cohort of Critically Ill Patients with Suspected Ventilated Pneumonia: A Retrospective Monocentric Observational Study

Pulmonary multiplex polymerase chain reaction (m-PCR) allows rapid pathogen detection. We aimed to assess its impact on initial antibiotic prescriptions in ventilated patients with suspected pneumonia. Between November 2020 and March 2022,ventilated patients with suspected pneumonia hospitalized in our ICU who benefited from respiratory sampling simultaneously tested using conventional microbiological methods and m-PCR were included. The proportion of appropriate changes in the initial antibiotic therapy following m-PCR results was assessed. We analyzed 104 clinical samples. Of the 47 negative m-PCR results, 16 (34%) led to an appropriate antibiotic strategy: 8 cessationsand 8 lack of initiation. Of the 57 positive m-PCR results, 51 (89%) resulted in an appropriate antibiotic strategy: 33 initiations, 2 optimizations, and 9 de-escalations. In the multivariate analysis, a positive m-PCR was associated with an appropriate antibiotic change (OR: 96.60; IC95% [9.72; 960.20], p < 0.001). A higher SAPS II score was negatively associated with an appropriate antibiotic change (OR: 0.96; IC95% [0.931; 0.997], p = 0.034). In our cohort, a positive m-PCR allowed for early initiation or adjustment of antibiotic therapy in almost 90% of cases. A negative m-PCR spared antibiotic use in onethird of cases. The impact of m-PCR results was reduced in the most severe patients.

Evaluation of point-of-care multiplex polymerase chain reaction in guiding antibiotic treatment of patients acutely admitted with suspected community-acquired pneumonia in Denmark: A multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rapid and accurate detection of pathogens is needed in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) to enable appropriate antibiotics and to slow the development of antibiotic resistance. We aimed to compare the effect of point-of-care (POC) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection of respiratory pathogens added to standard care with standard care only (SCO) on antibiotic prescriptions after acute hospital admission.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We performed a superiority, parallel-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial (RCT) in 3 Danish medical emergency departments (EDs) from March 2021 to February 2022. Adults acutely admitted with suspected CAP during the daytime on weekdays were included and randomly assigned (1:1) to POC-PCR (The Biofire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel plus added to standard care) or SCO (routine culture and, if requested by the attending physician, target-specific PCR) analysis of respiratory samples. We randomly assigned 294 patients with successfully collected samples (tracheal secretion 78.4% or expectorated sputum 21.6%) to POC-PCR (n = 148, 50.4%) or SCO (146, 49.6%). Patients and investigators owning the data were blinded to the allocation and test results. Outcome adjudicators and clinical staff at the ED were not blinded to allocation and test results but were together with the statistician, blinded to data management and analysis. Laboratory staff performing standard care analyses was blinded to allocation. The study coordinator was not blinded. Intention-to-treat and per protocol analysis were performed using logistic regression with Huber-White clustered standard errors for the prescription of antibiotic treatment. Loss to follow-up comprises 3 patients in the POC-PCR (2%) and none in the SCO group. Intention-to-treat analysis showed no difference in the primary outcome of prescriptions of no or narrow-spectrum antibiotics at 4 h after admission for the POC-PCR (n = 91, 62.8%) odds ratio (OR) 1.13; (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.96, 1.34] p = 0.134) and SCO (n = 87, 59.6%). Secondary outcomes showed that prescriptions were significantly more targeted at 4-h OR 5.68; (95% CI [2.49, 12.94] p < 0.001) and 48-h OR 4.20; (95% CI [1.87, 9.40] p < 0.001) and more adequate at 48-h OR 2.11; (95% CI [1.23, 3.61] p = 0.006) and on day 5 in the POC-PCR group OR 1.40; (95% CI [1.18, 1.66] p < 0.001). There was no difference between the groups in relation to intensive care unit (ICU) admissions OR 0.54; (95% CI [0.10, 2.91] p = 0.475), readmission within 30 days OR 0.90; (95% CI [0.43, 1.86] p = 0.787), length of stay (LOS) IRR 0.82; (95% CI [0.63, 1.07] p = 0.164), 30 days mortality OR 1.24; (95% CI [0.32, 4.82] p = 0.749), and in-hospital mortality OR 0.98; (95% CI [0.19, 5.06] p = 0.986).

CONCLUSIONS

In a setting with an already restrictive use of antibiotics, adding POC-PCR to the diagnostic setup did not increase the number of patients treated with narrow-spectrum or without antibiotics. POC-PCR may result in a more targeted and adequate use of antibiotics. A significant study limitation was the concurrent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulting in an unusually low transmission of respiratory virus.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04651712).

Antibiotic Prescriptions in Critically Ill Patients with Bloodstream Infection Due to ESBL-Producing Enterobacteriaceae: Compliance with the French Guidelines for the Treatment of Infections with Third-Generation Cephalosporin-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae-A Multicentric Retrospective Cohort Study

National and international guidelines were recently published regarding the treatment of Enterobacteriaceae resistant to third-generation cephalosporins infections. We aimed to assess the implementation of the French guidelines in critically ill patients suffering from extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae bloodstream infection (ESBL-E BSI). We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study in the ICU of three French hospitals. Patients treated between 2018 and 2022 for ESBL-E BSI were included. The primary assessment criterion was the proportion of adequate empirical carbapenem prescriptions, defined as prescriptions consistent with the French guidelines. Among the 185 included patients, 175 received an empirical anti-biotherapy within 24 h of ESBL-E BSI onset, with a carbapenem for 100 of them. The proportion of carbapenem prescriptions consistent with the guidelines was 81%. Inconsistent prescriptions were due to a lack of prescriptions of a carbapenem, while it was recommended in 25% of cases. The only factor independently associated with adequate empirical carbapenem prescription was ESBL-E colonization (OR: 107.921 [9.303-1251.910], p = 0.0002). The initial empirical anti-biotherapy was found to be appropriate in 83/98 patients (85%) receiving anti-biotherapy in line with the guidelines and in 56/77 (73%) patients receiving inadequate anti-biotherapy (p = 0.06). Our results illustrate the willingness of intensivists to spare carbapenems. Promoting implementation of the guidelines could improve the proportion of initial appropriate anti-biotherapy in critically ill patients with ESBL-E BSI.

The diagnostic utility of microscopic quality assessment of sputum samples in the era of rapid syndromic PCR testing

This prospective study assessed the value of initial microscopy evaluation of sputum samples submitted for rapid syndromic PCR-based testing. Bacterial detections by the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel plus in 126 high- and 108 low-quality sputum samples, based on initial microscopy evaluation in samples from patients with lower respiratory tract infections were compared. We found that high-quality samples had a higher proportion of bacterial detections compared to low-quality samples (P = 0.013). This included a higher proportion of detections of bacteria deemed clinically relevant by predefined criteria (70% and 55%, P = 0.016), as well as a higher proportion of detections of Haemophilus influenzae (36% and 20%, P = 0.010). High-quality samples also had more detections of bacteria with high semi-quantitative values. The study found no significant difference between high- and low-quality samples in the proportions of samples with a single species of bacteria detected, samples with a bacteria treated by the clinician, samples with detection of a proven etiology of community-acquired pneumonia by predefined criteria, the number of bacterial species detected, or the detection of Streptococcus pneumoniae, Moraxella catarrhalis, or Staphylococcus aureus. The results showed that 40% (95% CI 35%-47%) of the bacterial detections would have been missed if only high-quality samples were analyzed. This included 41% (27%-56%) of detections of S. pneumoniae, 33% (23%-45%) of detections of H. influenzae, 42% (28%-58%) of detections of S. aureus, and 37% (23%-54%) of detections of M. catarrhalis. These findings suggest that all sputum samples submitted for rapid syndromic PCR testing should be analyzed, regardless of initial microscopy quality assessment. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT04660084.) IMPORTANCE Microscopic quality assessment of sputum samples was originally designed for sputum culture, and its applicability in today's workflow, which includes syndromic PCR testing, may differ. Addressing this crucial gap, our study emphasizes the need to optimize the use and workflow of syndromic PCR panels, like the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia plus (FAP plus), in microbiology laboratories. These advanced PCR-based tests offer rapid and comprehensive pathogen detection for respiratory infections, yet their full potential remains uncertain. By comparing bacterial detections in high- and low-quality sputum samples, we underscore the importance of including low-quality samples in testing. Our findings reveal a significant proportion of potentially clinically relevant bacterial detections that would have been missed if only high-quality samples were analyzed. These insights support the efficient implementation of syndromic PCR panels, ultimately enhancing patient care and outcomes.

Diagnostic utility of oropharyngeal swabs as an alternative to lower respiratory tract samples for PCR-based syndromic testing in patients with community-acquired pneumonia

Syndromic PCR-based analysis of lower respiratory tract (LRT) samples in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) improves the bacterial yield and time-to-results compared to culture-based methods. However, obtaining adequate sputum samples can be challenging and is frequently not prioritized in the emergency department (ED). In this study, we assess the concordance of microbiological detections between oropharyngeal- (OP) and LRT samples from patients presenting to the ED with CAP using a syndromic PCR-based respiratory panel [Biofire FilmArray Pneumonia plus (FAP plus)]. Paired OP- and high-quality LRT samples were collected from 103 patients with confirmed CAP, who had been included in a randomized controlled trial (NCT04660084) or a subsequent observational study at Haukeland University Hospital, and analyzed using the FAP plus. The LRT samples were obtained mainly by sputum induction (88%). Using the LRT samples as a reference standard, the positive percent agreement (PPA), negative percent agreement (NPA), and overall percent agreement for the most common bacterial pathogens in CAP, Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae, were 85%, 99% and 95%, and 86%, 98% and 93%, respectively. For Moraxella catarrhalis, the PPA was lower (74%), while the NPA was 100%. For bacteria that are less likely causes of uncomplicated CAP (e.g., Staphylococcus aureus and Enterobacterales) the results were more divergent. In conclusion, the FAP plus detects the most common CAP pathogens S. pneumoniae and H. influenzae from OP samples with high PPAs and excellent NPAs when compared with LRT samples. For these pathogens, the PPAs for OP samples were higher than previous reports for nasopharyngeal samples. This suggests that analysis of OP samples with syndromic PCR panels could represent an alternative approach for rapid microbiological testing in the ED, especially in patients where LRT samples are difficult to obtain. Divergent results for bacteria that are less likely to cause uncomplicated CAP do, however, emphasize the need for clinical evaluation of positive test results.

Relationship between molecular pathogen detection and clinical disease in febrile children across Europe: a multicentre, prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

The PERFORM study aimed to understand causes of febrile childhood illness by comparing molecular pathogen detection with current clinical practice.

METHODS

Febrile children and controls were recruited on presentation to hospital in 9 European countries 2016-2020. Each child was assigned a standardized diagnostic category based on retrospective review of local clinical and microbiological data. Subsequently, centralised molecular tests (CMTs) for 19 respiratory and 27 blood pathogens were performed.

FINDINGS

Of 4611 febrile children, 643 (14%) were classified as definite bacterial infection (DB), 491 (11%) as definite viral infection (DV), and 3477 (75%) had uncertain aetiology. 1061 controls without infection were recruited. CMTs detected blood bacteria more frequently in DB than DV cases for N. meningitidis (OR: 3.37, 95% CI: 1.92-5.99), S. pneumoniae (OR: 3.89, 95% CI: 2.07-7.59), Group A streptococcus (OR 2.73, 95% CI 1.13-6.09) and E. coli (OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.02-6.71). Respiratory viruses were more common in febrile children than controls, but only influenza A (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.11-0.46), influenza B (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02-0.37) and RSV (OR 0.16, 95% CI: 0.06-0.36) were less common in DB than DV cases. Of 16 blood viruses, enterovirus (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23-0.72) and EBV (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.56-0.90) were detected less often in DB than DV cases. Combined local diagnostics and CMTs respectively detected blood viruses and respiratory viruses in 360 (56%) and 161 (25%) of DB cases, and virus detection ruled-out bacterial infection poorly, with predictive values of 0.64 and 0.68 respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Most febrile children cannot be conclusively defined as having bacterial or viral infection when molecular tests supplement conventional approaches. Viruses are detected in most patients with bacterial infections, and the clinical value of individual pathogen detection in determining treatment is low. New approaches are needed to help determine which febrile children require antibiotics.

FUNDING

EU Horizon 2020 grant 668303.

Aetiological agents of adult community-acquired pneumonia in Japan: systematic review and meta-analysis of published data

OBJECTIVE

Epidemiological information is essential in providing appropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy for pneumonia. This study aimed to clarify the epidemiology of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) by conducting a systematic review of published studies in Japan.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

DATA SOURCE

PubMed and Ichushi web database (January 1970 to October 2022).

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Clinical studies describing pathogenic micro-organisms in CAP written in English or Japanese, excluding studies on pneumonia other than adult CAP, investigations limited to specific pathogens and case reports.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Patient setting (inpatient vs outpatient), number of patients, concordance with the CAP guidelines, diagnostic criteria and methods for diagnosing pneumonia pathogens as well as the numbers of each isolate. A meta-analysis of various situations was performed to measure the frequency of each aetiological agent.

RESULTS

Fifty-six studies were included and 17 095 cases of CAP were identified. Pathogens were undetectable in 44.1% (95% CI 39.7% to 48.5%). Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most common cause of CAP requiring hospitalisation or outpatient care (20.0% (95% CI 17.2% to 22.8%)), followed by Haemophilus influenzae (10.8% (95% CI 7.3% to 14.3%)) and Mycoplasma pneumoniae (7.5% (95% CI 4.6% to 10.4%)). However, when limited to CAP requiring hospitalisation, Staphylococcus aureus was the third most common at 4.9% (95% CI 3.9% to 5.8%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa was more frequent in hospitalised cases, while atypical pathogens were less common. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus accounted for 40.7% (95% CI 29.0% to 52.4%) of S. aureus cases. In studies that used PCR testing for pan-respiratory viral pathogens, human enterovirus/human rhinovirus (9.4% (95% CI 0% to 20.5%)) and several other respiratory pathogenic viruses were detected. The epidemiology varied depending on the methodology and situation.

CONCLUSION

The epidemiology of CAP varies depending on the situation, such as in the hospital versus outpatient setting. Viruses are more frequently detected by exhaustive genetic searches, resulting in a significant variation in epidemiology.

Diagnostic accuracy of the BioFire® FilmArray® pneumonia panel in COVID-19 patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Ventilator-Associated pneumonia (VAP) is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in critically ill COVID-19 patients in lower-and-middle-income settings, where timely access to emergency care and accurate diagnostic testing is not widely available. Therefore, rapid microbiological diagnosis is essential to improve effective therapy delivery to affected individuals, preventing adverse outcomes and reducing antimicrobial resistance.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with suspected VAP and COVID-19, evaluating the diagnostic performance of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia Panel (FA-PP). Respiratory secretion samples underwent standard microbiological culture and FA-PP assays, and the results were compared.

RESULTS

We included 252 samples. The traditional culture method detected 141 microorganisms, and FA-PP detected 277, resulting in a sensitivity of 95% and specificity of 60%, with a positive predictive value of 68% and negative predictive value of 93%. In samples with high levels of genetic material (> 10^5 copies/mL), the panel had a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 86%. In addition, 40% of the culture-negative samples had positive FA-PP® results, of which 35% had > 10^5 copies/mL of genetic material. The most prevalent bacteria were Gram-negative bacilli, followed by Gram-positive cocci. The panel identified 98 genes associated with antimicrobial resistance, predominantly extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (28%).

CONCLUSION

The FA-PP is a sensitive assay for identifying bacteria causing VAP in patients with COVID-19, with a greater capacity to detect bacteria than the conventional method. The timely microbiological recognition offered by this panel could lead to optimized decision-making processes, earlier tailored treatment initiation, and improved antibiotic stewardship practices.

Implementation of a Rapid Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction Pneumonia Panel and Subsequent Antibiotic De-escalation

Background

Net effects of implementation of a multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) pneumonia panel (PNP) on antimicrobial stewardship are thus far unknown. This retrospective study evaluated the real-world impact of the PNP on time to antibiotic de-escalation in critically ill patients treated for pneumonia at an academic medical center.

Methods

This retrospective, quasi-experimental study included adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with respiratory culture results from 1 May to 15 August 2019 (pre-PNP group) and adult ICU patients with PNP results from 1 May to 15 August 2020 (PNP group) at Nebraska Medical Center. Patients were excluded for the following reasons: any preceding positive coronavirus disease 2019 PCR test, lack of antibiotic receipt, or non-respiratory tract infection indications for antibiotics. The primary outcome was time to discontinuation of anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) therapy. Secondary outcomes included time to discontinuation of antipseudomonal therapy, frequency of early discontinuation for atypical coverage, and overall duration (in days) of antibiotic therapy for pneumonia.

Results

Sixty-six patients in the pre-PNP group and 58 in the PNP group were included. There were significant differences in patient characteristics between groups. The median time to anti-MRSA agent discontinuation was 49.1 hours in the pre-PNP and 41.8 hours in the PNP group (P = .28). The median time to discontinuation of antipseudomonal agents was 134.4 hours in the pre-PNP versus 98.1 hours in the PNP group (P = .47). Other outcomes were numerically but not significantly improved in our sample.

Conclusions

This early look at implementation of a multiplex PNP did not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in antibiotic use but lays the groundwork to further evaluate a significant real-world impact on antibiotic de-escalation in ICU patients treated for pneumonia.

Recent updates in the development of molecular assays for the rapid identification and susceptibility testing of MRSA

INTRODUCTION

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a frequent cause of healthcare- and community-associated infections. Nasal carriage of MRSA is a risk factor for subsequent MRSA infections. Increased morbidity and mortality are associated with MRSA infections and screening and diagnostic tests for MRSA play an important role in clinical management.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was conducted in PubMed and supplemented by citation searching. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of molecular-based methods for MRSA screening and diagnostic tests including individual nucleic acid detection assays, syndromic panels, and sequencing technologies with a focus on their analytical performance.

EXPERT OPINION

Molecular based-assays for the detection of MRSA have improved in terms of accuracy and availability. Rapid turnaround enables earlier contact isolation and decolonization for MRSA. The availability of syndromic panel tests that include MRSA as a target has expanded from positive blood cultures to pneumonia and osteoarticular infections. Sequencing technologies allow detailed characterizations of novel methicillin-resistance mechanisms that can be incorporated into future assays. Next generation sequencing is capable of diagnosing MRSA infections that cannot be identified by conventional methods and metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) assays will likely move closer to implementation as front-line diagnostics in the near future.

ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for the management of severe community-acquired pneumonia

PURPOSE

Severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, and whilst European and non-European guidelines are available for community-acquired pneumonia, there are no specific guidelines for sCAP.

METHODS

The European Respiratory Society (ERS), European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID), and Latin American Thoracic Association (ALAT) launched a task force to develop the first international guidelines for sCAP. The panel comprised a total of 18 European and four non-European experts, as well as two methodologists. Eight clinical questions for sCAP diagnosis and treatment were chosen to be addressed. Systematic literature searches were performed in several databases. Meta-analyses were performed for evidence synthesis, whenever possible. The quality of evidence was assessed with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to decide on the direction and strength of recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations issued were related to diagnosis, antibiotics, organ support, biomarkers and co-adjuvant therapy. After considering the confidence in effect estimates, the importance of outcomes studied, desirable and undesirable consequences of treatment, cost, feasibility, acceptability of the intervention and implications to health equity, recommendations were made for or against specific treatment interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In these international guidelines, ERS, ESICM, ESCMID, and ALAT provide evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for diagnosis, empirical treatment, and antibiotic therapy for sCAP, following the GRADE approach. Furthermore, current knowledge gaps have been highlighted and recommendations for future research have been made.

Trends in Molecular Diagnosis of Nosocomial Pneumonia Classic PCR vs. Point-of-Care PCR: A Narrative Review

Nosocomial pneumonia is one of the most frequent hospital-acquired infections. One of the types of nosocomial pneumonia is ventilator-associated pneumonia, which occurs in endotracheally intubated patients in intensive care units (ICU). Ventilator-associated pneumonia may be caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens, which increase the risk of complications due to the difficulty in treating them. Pneumonia is a respiratory disease that requires targeted antimicrobial treatment initiated as early as possible to have a good outcome. For the therapy to be as specific and started sooner, diagnostic methods have evolved rapidly, becoming quicker and simpler to perform. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a rapid diagnostic technique with numerous advantages compared to classic plate culture-based techniques. Researchers continue to improve diagnostic methods; thus, the newest types of PCR can be performed at the bedside, in the ICU, so-called point of care testing-PCR (POC-PCR). The purpose of this review is to highlight the benefits and drawbacks of PCR-based techniques in managing nosocomial pneumonia.

ERS/ESICM/ESCMID/ALAT guidelines for the management of severe community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND

Severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, and while European and non-European guidelines are available for community-acquired pneumonia, there are no specific guidelines for sCAP.

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

The European Respiratory Society (ERS), European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM), European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) and Latin American Thoracic Association (ALAT) launched a task force to develop the first international guidelines for sCAP. The panel comprised a total of 18 European and four non-European experts, as well as two methodologists. Eight clinical questions for sCAP diagnosis and treatment were chosen to be addressed. Systematic literature searches were performed in several databases. Meta-analyses were performed for evidence synthesis, whenever possible. The quality of evidence was assessed with GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation). Evidence to Decision frameworks were used to decide on the direction and strength of recommendations.

RESULTS

Recommendations issued were related to diagnosis, antibiotics, organ support, biomarkers and co-adjuvant therapy. After considering the confidence in effect estimates, the importance of outcomes studied, desirable and undesirable consequences of treatment, cost, feasibility, acceptability of the intervention and implications to health equity, recommendations were made for or against specific treatment interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In these international guidelines, ERS, ESICM, ESCMID and ALAT provide evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for diagnosis, empirical treatment and antibiotic therapy for sCAP, following the GRADE approach. Furthermore, current knowledge gaps have been highlighted and recommendations for future research have been made.

Evaluation of BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia Panel in Bronchoalveolar Lavage Samples From Immunocompromised Patients With Suspected Pneumonia

Objectives Immunocompromised patients, specifically those with solid organ transplants or cancer on chemotherapy, are at particularly high risk of severe pneumonia and opportunistic infections. In select patients, bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) is performed to provide high-quality samples for analysis. We compare BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia Panel (BioFire Diagnostics, Salt Lake City, Utah, United States), a multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay, with standard of care diagnostics in BAL samples from immunocompromised patients to identify opportunities for this test to affect clinical decision making. Methods Patients hospitalized with pneumonia based on clinical and radiographic findings who underwent evaluation with bronchoscopy between May 2019 to January 2020 were reviewed. Among those patients undergoing bronchoscopy, those who were immunocompromised were selected for inclusion in the study. BAL specimens submitted to the microbiology laboratory were chosen based on as part of the internal validation of the panel in comparison with sputum culture at our hospitals. We compared the outcomes of the multiplex PCR assay with traditional culture methods and evaluated the role of PCR assay in de-escalating antimicrobial therapy. Results Twenty-four patients were identified for testing with the multiplex PCR assay. Of the 24 patients, 16 were immunocompromised, all with solid or hematological malignancy or a history of organ transplant. Seventeen individual BAL samples from the 16 patients were reviewed. BAL culture results and the multiplex PCR assay were in agreement in 13 samples (76.5%). In four cases, the multiplex PCR assay identified a possible causative pathogen not detected by standard workup. The median time to de-escalation of antimicrobials was three days (interquartile range (IQR) 2-4) from the day of collection of the BAL samples. Conclusions Studies have established the additive role of multiplex PCR testing in addition to traditional diagnostic tools like sputum culture in diagnosing the etiology of pneumonia. Limited data exist specifically looking at immunocompromised patients, in whom a timely and accurate diagnosis is particularly important. There is a potential benefit for performing multiplex PCR assays as an additive diagnostic tool in BAL samples for these patients.

Immunocompromised Host Pneumonia: Definitions and Diagnostic Criteria: An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report

Pneumonia imposes a significant clinical burden on people with immunocompromising conditions. Millions of individuals live with compromised immunity because of cytotoxic cancer treatments, biological therapies, organ transplants, inherited and acquired immunodeficiencies, and other immune disorders. Despite broad awareness among clinicians that these patients are at increased risk for developing infectious pneumonia, immunocompromised people are often excluded from pneumonia clinical guidelines and treatment trials. The absence of a widely accepted definition for immunocompromised host pneumonia is a significant knowledge gap that hampers consistent clinical care and research for infectious pneumonia in these vulnerable populations. To address this gap, the American Thoracic Society convened a workshop whose participants had expertise in pulmonary disease, infectious diseases, immunology, genetics, and laboratory medicine, with the goal of defining the entity of immunocompromised host pneumonia and its diagnostic criteria.