1887

Journal of Medical Microbiology logo

Volume 73, Issue 2

Rapid determination of antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative bacteria from clinical blood cultures using a scattered light-integrated collection device Open Access

Abstract

A bloodstream infection (BSI) presents a complex and serious health problem, a problem that is being exacerbated by increasing antimicrobial resistance (AMR).

The current turnaround times (TATs) for most antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) methods offer results retrospective of treatment decisions, and this limits the impact AST can have on antibiotic prescribing and patient care. Progress must be made towards rapid BSI diagnosis and AST to improve antimicrobial stewardship and reduce preventable deaths from BSIs. To support the successful implementation of rapid AST (rAST) in hospital settings, a rAST method that is affordable, is sustainable and offers comprehensive AMR detection is needed.

To evaluate a scattered light-integrated collection (SLIC) device against standard of care (SOC) to determine whether SLIC could accelerate the current TATs with actionable, accurate rAST results for Gram-negative BSIs.

Positive blood cultures from a tertiary referral hospital were studied prospectively. Flagged positive Gram-negative blood cultures were confirmed by Gram staining and analysed by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry, Vitek 2, disc diffusion (ceftriaxone susceptibility only) and an SLIC device. Susceptibility to a panel of five antibiotics, as defined by European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing breakpoints, was examined using SLIC.

A total of 505 bacterial–antimicrobial combinations were analysed. A categorical agreement of 95.5 % (482/505) was achieved between SLIC and SOC. The 23 discrepancies that occurred were further investigated by the broth microdilution method, with 10 AST results in agreement with SLIC and 13 in agreement with SOC. The mean time for AST was 10.53±0.46 h and 1.94±0.02 h for Vitek 2 and SLIC, respectively. SLIC saved 23.96±1.47 h from positive blood culture to AST result.

SLIC has the capacity to provide accurate AST 1 day earlier from flagged positive blood cultures than SOC. This significant time saving could accelerate time to optimal antimicrobial therapy, improving antimicrobial stewardship and management of BSIs.

  • Received:
  • Accepted:
  • Published Online:
Keyword(s): antimicrobial resistance , antimicrobial stewardship , antimicrobial susceptibility testing , blood culture , bloodstream infection and rapid diagnostics
Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • University of St Andrews
    • Principle Award Recipient: KerryJane Falconer
© 2024 The Authors
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001812
2024-02-28
2024-04-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/73/2/jmm001812.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001812&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. O’Neill J. Tackling Drug-Resistant Infections Globally: Final Report and Recommendations; 2016 https://amr-review.org/sites/default/files/160525_Final%20paper_with%20cover.pdf accessed 7 November 2020
  2. Health Action International (HAI) Diagnostics to address antimicrobial resistance; 2023 https://haiweb.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Diagnostics-to-address-antimicrobial-resistance.pdf accessed 24 July 2023
  3. Annual Epidemiological Report for 2019 Annual Epidemiological report - EARS-Net 2019 (europa.eu); 2019 accessed 10 August 2022
  4. Kern WV, Rieg S. Burden of bacterial bloodstream infection-a brief update on epidemiology and significance of multidrug-resistant pathogens. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020; 26:151–157 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Buehler SS, Madison B, Snyder SR, Derzon JH, Cornish NE et al. Effectiveness of practices to increase timeliness of providing targeted therapy for inpatients with bloodstream infections: a laboratory medicine best practices systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Microbiol Rev 2016; 29:59–103 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Public Health England (PHE) UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations: Investigation of blood cultures (for organisms other than Mycobacterium species); 2019 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/829758/B_37i8.2.pdf accessed 21 June 2020
  7. Tabak YP, Vankeepuram L, Ye G, Jeffers K, Gupta V et al. Blood culture turnaround time in U.S. Acute care hospitals and implications for laboratory process optimization. J Clin Microbiol 2018; 56:00955–01137 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Retamar P, Portillo MM, López-Prieto MD, Rodríguez-López F, de Cueto M et al. Impact of inadequate empirical therapy on the mortality of patients with bloodstream infections: a propensity score-based analysis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012; 56:472–478 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Kumar A, Roberts D, Wood KE, Light B, Parrillo JE et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med 2006; 34:1589–1596 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Beganovic M, Costello M, Wieczorkiewicz SM. Effect of matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) alone versus MALDI-TOF MS combined with real-time antimicrobial stewardship interventions on time to optimal antimicrobial therapy in patients with positive blood cultures. J Clin Microbiol 2017; 55:1437–1445 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Bookstaver PB, Nimmich EB, Smith TJ, Justo JA, Kohn J et al. Cumulative effect of an antimicrobial stewardship and rapid diagnostic testing bundle on early streamlining of antimicrobial therapy in gram-negative bloodstream infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017; 61:e00189-17 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Timbrook TT, Morton JB, McConeghy KW, Caffrey AR, Mylonakis E et al. The effect of molecular rapid diagnostic testing on clinical outcomes in bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2017; 64:15–23 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hammond RJH, Falconer K, Powell T, Bowness R, Gillespie SH. A simple label-free method reveals bacterial growth dynamics and antibiotic action in real-time. Sci Rep 2022; 12:19393 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  14. EUCAST MIC determination of non-fastidious and fastidious organisms. eucast: MIC determination; 2019 accessed 27 April 2020
  15. Vihta K-D, Stoesser N, Llewelyn MJ, Quan TP, Davies T et al. Trends over time in Escherichia coli bloodstream infections, urinary tract infections, and antibiotic susceptibilities in Oxfordshire, UK, 1998-2016: a study of electronic health records. Lancet Infect Dis 2018; 18:1138–1149 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Public Health England Laboratory Surveillance of polymicrobial bacteraemia and 607 fungaemia in England, Wales and Northern Ireland: 2017: 2018 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/691268/hpr1018_polymcrbls.pdf accessed 16 April 2020
  17. EUCAST Rapid AST directly from blood culture bottles. EUCAST: Rapid AST in blood cultures; 2022 accessed 31 May 2022
  18. Anton-Vazquez V, Adjepong S, Suarez C, Planche T. Evaluation of a new rapid antimicrobial susceptibility system for gram-negative and gram-positive bloodstream infections: speed and accuracy of alfred 60AST. BMC Microbiol 2019; 19:268 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Q-Linea ASTar; 2019 https://www.qlinea.com/ourproducts/astar/astar-instrument/ accessed 19 October 2019
  20. Pancholi P, Carroll KC, Buchan BW, Chan RC, Dhiman N et al. Multicenter evaluation of the accelerate phenotest BC kit for rapid identification and phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing using morphokinetic cellular analysis. J Clin Microbiol 2018; 56:e01329-17 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Costa-de-Oliveira S, Teixeira-Santos R, Silva AP, Pinho E, Mergulhão P et al. Potential impact of flow cytometry antimicrobial susceptibility testing on the clinical management of gram-negative bacteremia using the FASTinov® kit. Front Microbiol 2017; 8:2455 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kim J-H, Kim TS, Song SH, Choi J, Han S et al. Direct rapid antibiotic susceptibility test (dRAST) for blood culture and its potential usefulness in clinical practice. J Med Microbiol 2018; 67:325–331 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Schneider C, Babcock K, Harris P et al. Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility tests by mass measurement on a 96-well plate. ASM Microbe 2016
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Nolte FS, Contestable PB, Lincalis D, Punsalang A. Rapid, direct antibiotic susceptibility testing of blood culture isolates using the abbott avantage system. Am J Clin Pathol 1986; 86:665–669 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Zboromyrska Y, Cillóniz C, Cobos-Trigueros N, Almela M, Hurtado JC et al. Sepsis real-time test for the rapid diagnosis of bloodstream infections in adults. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2019; 9:e00189-17 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  26. van Belkum A, Burnham C-AD, Rossen JWA, Mallard F, Rochas O et al. Innovative and rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing systems. Nat Rev Microbiol 2020; 18:299–311 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Kollef MH, Sherman G, Ward S, Fraser VJ. Inadequate antimicrobial treatment of infections: a risk factor for hospital mortality among critically ill patients. Chest 1999; 115:462–474 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Paul M, Shani V, Muchtar E, Kariv G, Robenshtok E et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy for sepsis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54:4851–4863 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Lee C-C, Lee C-H, Hong M-Y, Tang H-J, Ko W-C. Timing of appropriate empirical antimicrobial administration and outcome of adults with community-onset bacteremia. Crit Care 2017; 21:119 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Robineau O, Robert J, Rabaud C, Bedos J-P, Varon E et al. Management and outcome of bloodstream infections: a prospective survey in 121 French hospitals (SPA-BACT survey). Infect Drug Resist 2018; 11:1359–1368 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Anton-Vazquez V, Suarez C, Planche T. Impact of rapid susceptibility testing on antimicrobial therapy and clinical outcomes in gram-negative bloodstream infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 2022; 77:771–781 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Tayside NHS. Hospital Adult Empirical Treatment of Infection Guidelines; 2020 https://www.nhstaysideadtc.scot.nhs.uk/Antibiotic%20site/pdf%20docs/Antibiotic%20hospital%20man%20.pdf accessed 30 April 2020
  33. Patolia S, Abate G, Patel N, Patolia S, Frey S. Risk factors and outcomes for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli bacteremia. Ther Adv Infect Dis 2018; 5:11–18 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Shen JP, Chou CF. Morphological plasticity of bacteria-open questions. Biomicrofluidics 2016; 10:031501 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Lenhard JR, Bulman ZP. Inoculum effect of β-lactam antibiotics. J Antimicrob Chemother 2019; 74:2825–2843 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Weinbren MJ, Collins M, Heathcote R, Umar M, Nisar M et al. Optimization of the blood culture pathway: a template for improved sepsis management and diagnostic antimicrobial stewardship. J Hosp Infect 2018; 98:232–235 [View Article] [PubMed]
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001812
Loading
Rapid determination of antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative bacteria from clinical blood cultures using a scattered light-integrated collection device
J. Med. Microbiol. 73, 001812 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001812
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001812
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.001812
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Supplements

Supplementary material 1

PDF

Most cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error