Detail
Article
Online article
FT
Medvik - BMC
  • Something wrong with this record ?

Direct detection of ESKAPEc pathogens from whole blood using the T2Bacteria Panel allows early antimicrobial stewardship intervention in patients with sepsis

P. Drevinek, J. Hurych, M. Antuskova, J. Tkadlec, J. Berousek, Z. Prikrylova, J. Bures, J. Vajter, M. Soucek, J. Masopust, V. Martinkova, J. Adamkova, V. Hysperska, E. Bebrova

. 2021 ; 10 (3) : e1210. [pub] -

Language English Country Great Britain

Document type Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Persistent link   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc22012428

In the microbiological diagnosis of bloodstream infections (BSI), blood culture (BC) is considered the gold standard test despite its limitations such as low sensitivity and slow turnaround time. A new FDA-cleared and CE-marked platform utilizing magnetic resonance to detect amplified DNA of the six most common and/or problematic BSI pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Escherichia coli; referred to as ESKAPEc) is available and may shorten the time to diagnosis and potentially improve antimicrobial utilization. Whole blood samples from hospitalized patients with clinical signs of sepsis were analyzed using the T2Bacteria Panel (T2Biosystems) and compared to simultaneously collected BC. Discrepant results were evaluated based on clinical infection criteria, combining supporting culture results and the opinion of treating physicians. A total of 55 samples from 53 patients were evaluated. The sensitivity and specificity of the T2Bacteria panel was 94% (16 out of 17 detections of T2Bacteria-targeted organisms) and 100%, respectively, with 36.4% (8 of 22) causes of BSI detected only by this method. The T2Bacteria Panel detected pathogens on average 55 hours faster than standard BC. In our study, 9 of 15 patients with positive T2Bacteria Panel results received early-targeted antibiotic therapy and/or modification of antimicrobial treatment based on T2Bacteria Panel findings. Given the high reliability, faster time to detection, and easy workflow, the technique qualifies as a point-of-care testing approach.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22012428
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20220506131238.0
007      
ta
008      
220425s2021 xxk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1002/mbo3.1210 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)34180598
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxk
100    1_
$a Drevinek, Pavel $u Department of Medical Microbiology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000289945240 $7 xx0075827
245    10
$a Direct detection of ESKAPEc pathogens from whole blood using the T2Bacteria Panel allows early antimicrobial stewardship intervention in patients with sepsis / $c P. Drevinek, J. Hurych, M. Antuskova, J. Tkadlec, J. Berousek, Z. Prikrylova, J. Bures, J. Vajter, M. Soucek, J. Masopust, V. Martinkova, J. Adamkova, V. Hysperska, E. Bebrova
520    9_
$a In the microbiological diagnosis of bloodstream infections (BSI), blood culture (BC) is considered the gold standard test despite its limitations such as low sensitivity and slow turnaround time. A new FDA-cleared and CE-marked platform utilizing magnetic resonance to detect amplified DNA of the six most common and/or problematic BSI pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Escherichia coli; referred to as ESKAPEc) is available and may shorten the time to diagnosis and potentially improve antimicrobial utilization. Whole blood samples from hospitalized patients with clinical signs of sepsis were analyzed using the T2Bacteria Panel (T2Biosystems) and compared to simultaneously collected BC. Discrepant results were evaluated based on clinical infection criteria, combining supporting culture results and the opinion of treating physicians. A total of 55 samples from 53 patients were evaluated. The sensitivity and specificity of the T2Bacteria panel was 94% (16 out of 17 detections of T2Bacteria-targeted organisms) and 100%, respectively, with 36.4% (8 of 22) causes of BSI detected only by this method. The T2Bacteria Panel detected pathogens on average 55 hours faster than standard BC. In our study, 9 of 15 patients with positive T2Bacteria Panel results received early-targeted antibiotic therapy and/or modification of antimicrobial treatment based on T2Bacteria Panel findings. Given the high reliability, faster time to detection, and easy workflow, the technique qualifies as a point-of-care testing approach.
650    _2
$a Acinetobacter baumannii $x účinky léků $x genetika $x izolace a purifikace $7 D040981
650    _2
$a antibakteriální látky $x farmakologie $7 D000900
650    _2
$a antibiotická politika $x metody $7 D000073602
650    _2
$a bakteriemie $x krev $x farmakoterapie $x mikrobiologie $7 D016470
650    _2
$a krev $x mikrobiologie $7 D001769
650    _2
$a kultivační vyšetření krve $7 D000071997
650    _2
$a Enterococcus faecium $x účinky léků $x genetika $x izolace a purifikace $7 D016984
650    _2
$a Escherichia coli $x účinky léků $x genetika $x izolace a purifikace $7 D004926
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a Klebsiella pneumoniae $x účinky léků $x genetika $x izolace a purifikace $7 D007711
650    _2
$a prospektivní studie $7 D011446
650    _2
$a Pseudomonas aeruginosa $x účinky léků $x genetika $x izolace a purifikace $7 D011550
650    _2
$a Staphylococcus aureus $x účinky léků $x genetika $x izolace a purifikace $7 D013211
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Hurych, Jakub $u Department of Medical Microbiology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/0000000298135290
700    1_
$a Antuskova, Milena $u Department of Medical Microbiology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Tkadlec, Jan $u Department of Medical Microbiology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $1 https://orcid.org/000000020892924X
700    1_
$a Berousek, Jan $u Department of Anesthesiology and ICM, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Prikrylova, Zuzana $u Department of Anesthesiology and ICM, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Bures, Jiri $u Department of Anesthesiology and ICM, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Vajter, Jaromir $u Department of Anesthesiology and ICM, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Soucek, Martin $u Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Masopust, Jan $u Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Martinkova, Vendula $u Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Adamkova, Jaroslava $u Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Hysperska, Veronika $u Department of Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Bebrova, Eliska $u Department of Medical Microbiology, 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Motol University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00184561 $t MicrobiologyOpen $x 2045-8827 $g Roč. 10, č. 3 (2021), s. e1210
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34180598 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20220425 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20220506131230 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1789853 $s 1163629
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 10 $c 3 $d e1210 $e - $i 2045-8827 $m MicrobiologyOpen $n Microbiologyopen $x MED00184561
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20220425
Back

Find record

Citation metrics

Archiving options