Clinical Efficacy Evaluation of Multi-parameter Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction for the Central Venous Catheter-related Blood Stream Infection

Bongyoung Kim; Sewoo Park; Taehyung Kim; Jieun Kim; Donghwi Rim; Taeyeal Choi; Hyunjoo Pai; Jungoak Kang

doi:10.3947/ic.2011.43.3.240

Journal List > Infect Chemother > v.43(3) > 1035084

Go to TopGo to Top Go to BottomGo to Bottom

TOOLS

Kim, Park, Kim, Kim, Rim, Choi, Pai, and Kang: Clinical Efficacy Evaluation of Multi-parameter Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction for the Central Venous Catheter-related Blood Stream Infection

Original Article

Infection & Chemotherapy

Infection & Chemotherapy 2011; 43(3): 240-244.

Published online: 29 June 2011

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3947/ic.2011.43.3.240

Clinical Efficacy Evaluation of Multi-parameter Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction for the Central Venous Catheter-related Blood Stream Infection

Bongyoung Kim^1,^*, Sewoo Park^1,^*, Taehyung Kim¹, Jieun Kim¹, Donghwi Rim¹, Taeyeal Choi², Hyunjoo Pai¹, Jungoak Kang²

¹Department of Internal Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

²Department of Laboratory Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Correspondence to Hyunjoo Pai, M.D.¹, Jungoak Kang, M.D.² Departments of ¹Internal Medicine, and ²Laboratory Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine, 17 Haengdang-dong, Seoungdong-gu, Seoul 133-792, Korea. Tel: +82-2-2290-8356¹, +82-31-560-2572², Fax: +82-2-2298-9183¹, +82-31-560-2585², paihj@hanyang.ac.kr¹, jokang@hanyang.ac.kr²

Equal contributor:

*First authors contributed equally to this work.

Received 4 August 2010 Revised 31 March 2011 Accepted 4 April 2011

(open-access):

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Background

The study evaluated the clinical efficacy of a multi-parameter real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for patients with central venous catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI).

Materials and Methods

Thirty five patients suspected to have CRBSI were enrolled. The SeptiFast™ (SF) multi-parameter real-time PCR test (Roche Diagnostics, Germany) and blood culture were performed and results were compared.

Results

The turn-around time for the SF test and blood culture was 32.6±28.9 hours and 115.8±23.5 hours, respectively. Among the 70 blood samples, the positive rates of SF test and blood culture were 34.3% and 27.1%, respectively, and the agreement rate was 62.9%. Gram-positive bacteria were detected in 10 patients with blood culture and 11 patients with SF test. Gram-negative bacteria were detected in one patient with a blood culture and in seven patients with SF test. Candida was not detected in blood culture but was detected in two patients by the SF test.

Conclusions

SF test was faster and more sensitive for the detection of blood pathogens than blood culture. It provides a more sensitive detection of gram-negative and Candida in blood than does blood culture testing.

Keywords: SeptiFast test, Catheter-related infections, Blood culture

Figures and Tables

Table 1

Master list of the SeptiFast Test for the Detection and Identification of 25 Bacterial and Fungal Pathogens Responsible for the Majority of Sepsis Cases

^acoagulase negative staphylococci.

Table 2

Interpretation of the Discordant Cases between the SeptiFast Test and Blood Culture

BC, blood culture; SF, SeptiFast.

Table 3

Comparison of Detected Number of Bacterial or Fungal Pathogens between SeptiFast Test and Blood Culture^a

BC, blood culture; SF, SeptiFast.

^aIn five cases, multiple pathogens were detected in the SeptiFast test.

^bIncludes discordant case number 13 (SF false identification).

References

1. Angus DC, Linde-Zwirble WT, Lidicker J, Clermont G, Carcillo J, Pinsky MR. Epidemiology of severe sepsis in the United States: analysis of incidence, outcome, and associated costs of care. Crit Care Med. 2001. 29:1303–1310.

2. Richards MJ, Edwards JR, Culver DH, Gaynes RP. Nosocomial infections in medical intensive care units in the United States. National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System. Crit Care Med. 1999. 27:887–892.

3. Maki DG, Kluger DM, Crnich CJ. The risk of bloodstream infection in adults with different intravascular devices: a systematic review of 200 published prospective studies. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006. 81:1159–1171.

4. Dimopoulos G, Falagas ME. Approach to the febrile patient in the ICU. Infect Dis Clin North Am. 2009. 23:471–484.

5. McGee DC, Gould MK. Preventing complications of central venous catheterization. N Engl J Med. 2003. 348:1123–1133.

6. Pittet D, Tarara D, Wenzel RP. Nosocomial bloodstream infection in critically ill patients. Excess length of stay, extra costs, and attributable mortality. JAMA. 1994. 271:1598–1601.

7. Renaud B, Brun-Buisson C. ICU-Bacteremia Study Group. Outcomes of primary and catheter-related bacteremia. A cohort and case-control study in critically ill patients. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001. 163:1584–1590.

8. Marschall J. Catheter-associated bloodstream infections: looking outside of the ICU. Am J Infect Control. 2008. 36:S172.e5–S172.e8.

9. Mermel LA, Allon M, Bouza E, Craven DE, Flynn P, O'Grady NP, Raad II, Rijnders BJ, Sherertz RJ, Warren DK. Clinical practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of intravascular catheter-related infection: 2009 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2009. 49:1–45.

10. Schrenzel J. Clinical relevance of new diagnostic methods for bloodstream infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2007. 30:Suppl 1. S2–S6.

11. Sleigh J, Cursons R, La Pine M. Detection of bacteraemia in critically ill patients using 16S rDNA polymerase chain reaction and DNA sequencing. Intensive Care Med. 2001. 27:1269–1273.

12. Lehmann LE, Hunfeld KP, Emrich T, Haberhausen G, Wissing H, Hoeft A, Stüber F. A multiplex real-time PCR assay for rapid detection and differentiation of 25 bacterial and fungal pathogens from whole blood samples. Med Microbiol Immunol. 2008. 197:313–324.

13. Kim BN. Blood cultures: principles and practices. Infect Chemother. 2007. 39:111–116.

14. Murray PR, Witebsky FG. Mandell GL, Bennett JF, Dolin R, editors. The clinician and the microbiology laboratory. Principles and practice of infectious diseases. 2009. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone;236–238.

15. Safdar N, Fine JP, Maki DG. Meta-analysis: methods for diagnosing intravascular device-related bloodstream infection. Ann Intern Med. 2005. 142:451–466.

16. Raad I, Hanna HA, Alakech B, Chatzinikolaou I, Johnson MM, Tarrand J. Differential time to positivity: a useful method for diagnosing catheter-related bloodstream infections. Ann Intern Med. 2004. 140:18–25.

17. Klaerner HG, Eschenbach U, Kamereck K, Lehn N, Wagner H, Miethke T. Failure of an automated blood culture system to detect nonfermentative gram-negative bacteria. J Clin Microbiol. 2000. 38:1036–1041.

TOOLS

ORCID iDs: Jungoak Kang
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9181-6819
Similar articles