| Literature DB >> 31175842 |
Milene Gonçalves Quiles1, Bruno Cruz Boettger2, Fernanda Matsiko Inoue3, Jussimara Monteiro3, Daniel Wagner Santos4, Vinicius Ponzio4, Fabianne Carlesse5, Paola Cappellano6, Cecilia Godoy Carvalhaes7, Antonio Carlos Campos Pignatari2.
Abstract
Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are serious infections associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Every hour delay in initiation of an effective antibiotic increases mortality due to sepsis by 7%. Turnaround time (TAT) for conventional blood cultures takes 48h, forcing physicians to streamline therapy by exposing patients to broad-spectrum antimicrobials. Our objective was (1) to evaluate the accuracy and TAT of an optimized workflow combining direct matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) and in-house real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for bacterial identification and antimicrobial resistance profiling directly from positive blood bottles for diagnosing bloodstream infections and (2) to verify the effect of reporting results to medical staff. A total of 103 BSI episodes from 91 patients admitted to three hospitals in São Paulo, Brazil were included. TAT from molecular versus conventional methods was measured and compared. Our protocol showed an overall agreement of 93.5% for genus and 78.5% for species identification; 74.2% for methicillin resistance detection, 89.2% for extended-spectrum β-lactamase profiling, 77.8% for metallo-β-lactamase profiling, and 100% for carbapenemase profile and vancomycin-resistance detection when compared with conventional testing. TAT of molecular sample processing according to our protocol was 38h shorter than conventional methods. Antimicrobial interventions were possible in 27 BSI episodes. Antimicrobial discontinuation was achieved in 12 BSI episodes while escalation of therapy occurred in 15 episodes. Antimicrobial therapy was inadequate in three (12%) BSI episodes diagnosed using results of molecular testing. Our in-house rapid protocol for identifying both bacteria and antimicrobial resistance provided rapid and accurate results, having good agreement with conventional testing results. These results could contribute to faster antimicrobial therapy interventions in BSI episodes.Entities:
Keywords: Bloodstream infections; Mass spectrometry; Molecular diagnosis; Molecular panels; PCR
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31175842 PMCID: PMC9428233 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjid.2019.05.005
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Infect Dis ISSN: 1413-8670 Impact factor: 3.257
Oligonucleotides used in the developed protocol for antimicrobial resistance genes and internal DNA control detection.
| Antimicrobial resistance target | Genes | Primers | Oligonucleotide sequence (5′to3′) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Panel 1: carbapenemases | blaKPC-F | TCGCTAAACTCGAACAGG | Monteiro et al. (2009) | |
| blaKPC-R | TTACTGCCCGTTGACGCCCAATC | |||
| blaOXA-48F | TGTTTTTGGTGGCATCGAT | Monteiro et al. (2012) | ||
| blaOXA-48R | TGTAAMRATGCTTGGTTCGC | |||
| blaNDM-F | TTGGCCTTGCTGTCCTTG | |||
| blaNDM-R | ACACCAGTGACAATATCACCG | |||
| blaGES-F | CTATTACTGGCAGGGATCG | |||
| blaGES-R | CCTCTCAATGGTGTGGGT | |||
| blaIMP-F | GAATAGRRTGGCTTAAYTCTC | Mendes et al. (2005) | ||
| blaIMP-R | AACTAYCCAATAYRTAAC | |||
| blaVIM-F | GTTTGGTCGCATATCGCAAC | |||
| blaVIM-R | AATGCGCAGCACCAGGATAG | |||
| Painel 2: MBLs | blaSPM-F | CTAAATCGAGAGCCCTGCTTG | Mendes et al. (2005) | |
| blaSPM-R | CCTTTTCCGCGACCTTGATC | |||
| blaGIM F | TCAATTAGCTCTTGGGCTGAC | |||
| blaGIM R | CGGAACGACCATTTGAATGG | |||
| blaSIM F | GTACAAGGGATTCGGCATCG | |||
| blaSIM R | TGGCCTGTTCCCATGTGAG | |||
| Painel 3: ESBLs | blaSHV-F | ATGCGTTATACGCCTGTG | Monstein et al. (2007) | |
| blaSHV-R | TGCTTTGTATTCGGGCCAA | |||
| blaTEM-F | TGCCGCATACACTATTCTCAGAATGA | |||
| blaTEM-R | ACGCTCACCGGCTCCAGATTTAT | |||
| blaCTX-F | ATGTGCAGYACCAGTAARGTKATGGC | |||
| blaCTX-R | TGGGTRAARTARGTSACCAGAAYCAGCGG | |||
| Gram positive resistance: meticilin and vancomicyn | mecA-F | AAAATCGATGGTAAAGGTTGGC | Murakami et al. (1991) | |
| mecA-R | AGTTCTGCAGTACCGGATTTGC | |||
| mecC F | ATCAAGACTTGCATTCAGGC | Petersdorfa et al. (2015) | ||
| mecC R | GCGGTTTCAATTCACTTGTC | |||
| vanA-F | AACCATGGAATATGAAATCAACCA | Dutka-Malen et al. (1995) | ||
| vanA-R | TGCAAAGCTGAAAATGCTACA | |||
| vanB-F | ATGGGAAGCCGATAGTC | |||
| vanB-R | GATTTCGTTCCTCGACC | |||
| vanC-F | GGTATCAAGGAAACCTC | |||
| vanC-R | CTTCCGCCATCATAGCT | |||
| Panel 4: 16s rDNA methyltransferases | rmtB | rmtB-F | ACTTTTACAATCCCTCAATAC | Berçot et al. (2011) |
| rmtB-R | AAGTATATAAGTTCTGTTCCG | |||
| rmtD | rmtD-F | GGAAAAGGACGTGGACA | ||
| rmtD-R | TCCATCGATTCCACAGG | |||
| rmtG | rmtG-F | ACGGAATGCCGCGCGAAGTA | Corrêa et al. (2014) | |
| rmtG-R | TCTCCGCAAGCAGATCGCCG | |||
| armA | armA-F | ATTTTAGATTTTGGTTGTGGC | ||
| armA-R | ATCTCAGCTCTATCAATATCG | |||
| Internal control | BetaGlob F | GGGAAAATAGACCAATAGGCAGAGAG | Bispo et al. (2011) | |
| BetaGlob R | CAGGGCAGAGCCATCTATTGC |
Patients demographics, samples and bloodstream infection (BSI) episodes included in the study.
| 111 | |
| 103 | |
| Center 1 | 52.4% |
| Center 2 | 38.8% |
| Center 3 | 8.8% |
| Neutropenia | 25.2% |
| Antimicrobial use at enrolment | 94.2% |
| Gram negative | 58.2% |
| Gram positive | 41.8% |
| Sex, % | 72.5% male/27.5% female |
| Mean age, years | 32.2 ± 24.9 |
| Range 1–84 | |
| 41.7% | |
| Kidney | 36.3% |
| Stem cell | 5.5% |
| Systemic arterial hypertension | 16.5% |
| Chronic kidney disease in hemodialysis | 16.5% |
| Acute myeloid leukemia | 13.2% |
| Acute lymphoid leukemia | 11.0% |
| Chronic kidney disease in peritoneal dialysis | 7.7% |
| Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma | 5.5% |
| Retinoblastoma | 5.5% |
| Diabetes mellitus | 4.4% |
| Central Nervous System Tumors | 4.4% |
| Sickle cell or aplastic anemia | 2.3% |
| Neuroblastoma | 2.3% |
Intra-laboratory turnaround time (TAT) components for molecular and phenotypic analysis of 111 samples included in this study.
| TTP (h) | TAT1 (h) | TAT2 (h) | Anticipation (h) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median | 11.32 | 13.06 | 47 | −38.34 |
| Mean | 14.28 | 13.18 | 48.2 | −35.02 |
| SD mean | 0.4 | 0.253 | 0.977 | 1.009 |
| Median | 12.01 | 9.1 | 47.57 | −40.18 |
| Mean | 14.53 | 10.08 | 48.22 | −38.14 |
| SD mean | 0.384 | 0.16 | 0.921 | 0.952 |
| Median | 9.5 | 20.24 | 39.53 | −17.03 |
| Mean | 13.38 | 19.34 | 48.16 | −28.42 |
| SD mean | 0.427 | 0.192 | 1.079 | 1.066 |
TTP, time to positivity; TAT1, timing for molecular report; TAT2, timing for conventional microbiology final result.
Clinical evaluation of the molecular protocol and therapeutic interventions performed on BSIs episodes.
| Episodes ( | The molecular protocol was useful? | Number of interventions | Modifications (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes votes (%) | No votes (%) | Escalation | De-escalation | |||
| Overall episodes | 103 | 79.60 | 20.40 | 15 | 12 | 26.2 |
| Center 1 | 54 | 83.30 | 16.70 | 6 | 10 | 29.6 |
| Center 2 | 40 | 70.00 | 30.00 | 3 | 1 | 10.0 |
| Center 3 | 9 | 100 | 0.00 | 6 | 1 | 77.8 |
Fig. 1Interventions observed in the antimicrobial therapy of included BSI episodes after molecular results report.