| Literature DB >> 23924662 |
Lucrecia Carrara1,2, Ferran Navarro1,2, Miquel Turbau3,1, Montse Seres3,1, Indalecio Morán4,1, Isabel Quintana4,1, Rodrigo Martino5,1, Yesica González1,2, Albert Brell1,2, Oscar Cordon1,2, Karol Diestra1,2, Caterina Mata1,2, Beatriz Mirelis1,2, Pere Coll1,2.
Abstract
Mortality from bloodstream infections (BSIs) correlates with diagnostic delay and the use of inappropriate empirical treatment. Early PCR-based diagnosis could decrease inappropriate treatment, improving patient outcome. The aim of the present study was to assess the clinical utility of this molecular technology to diagnose BSIs. We assessed a new dual-priming oligonucleotide-based multiplex PCR assay, the Magicplex Sepsis Test (MST) (Seegene), along with blood culture (BC). A total of 267 patients from the intensive care unit and haematology and emergency departments were enrolled. Clinical data were also used by physicians to determine the likelihood of infection. Ninety-eight (37 %) specimens were positive: 29 (11 %) by both the MST and BC, 29 (11 %) by the MST only, and 40 (15 %) by BC only. The proportion of agreement between the two methods was 73 % (Cohen's κ: 0.45; 0.28-0.6; indicating fair to moderate agreement). According to clinical assessment, 63 (64 %) positive specimens were considered BSIs: 23 (36 %) were positive by both the MST and BC, 22 (35 %) were positive only by BC, and 18 (29 %) were positive only by the MST. Thirty-eight (14 %) positive specimens by the MST and/or BC were considered as contaminants. Of 101 specimens collected from patients receiving antibiotics, 20 (20 %) were positive by the MST and 32 (32 %) by BC. Sensitivity and specificity were 65 % and 92 %, respectively, for the MST and 71 % and 88 %, respectively for BC. We concluded that the MST shows a high specificity but changes in design are needed to increase bacteraemia detection. For viability in clinical laboratories, technical improvements are also required to further automate the process.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23924662 DOI: 10.1099/jmm.0.064758-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Med Microbiol ISSN: 0022-2615 Impact factor: 2.472