» Articles » PMID: 33447631

Performance of a Semiquantitative Multiplex Bacterial and Viral PCR Panel Compared With Standard Microbiological Laboratory Results: 396 Patients Studied With the BioFire Pneumonia Panel

Overview
Date 2021 Jan 15
PMID 33447631
Citations 16
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Microbiologic results are critical to optimal management of patients with lower respiratory tract infection, but standard methods may take several days. The multiplex polymerase chain reaction BioFire Pneumonia (PN) panel detects 15 common bacterial species semiquantitatively as copy number/mL, 8 viral species, and 7 resistance genes in about an hour within the clinical laboratory.

Methods: We tested 396 unique endotracheal or bronchoalveolar lavage specimens with the BioFire Pneumonia panel and compared the bacterial detections to conventional gram stain and culture results.

Results: Of the 396 patients, 138 grew at least 1 bacterium that had a target on the PN panel, and 136/138 (98.6%) were detected by the panel. A total of 177 isolates were recovered in culture and the PN panel detected 174/177 (98.3%). A further 20% of patients had additional targets detected that were not found on standard culture (specificity 69%, positive predictive value 63%, and negative predictive value 98.9%). Copy number was strongly related to standard semiquantitative growth on plates reported by the laboratory (eg, 1+, 2+, 3+ growths) and was significantly higher in those specimens that grew a potential pathogen. Both higher copy number and bacterial detections found by the PN panel, but not found in culture, were strongly positively related to the level of white blood cells reported in the initial gram stain.

Conclusions: Higher copy number and bacterial detections by the PN panel are related to the host respiratory tract inflammatory response. If laboratories can achieve a rapid turnaround time, the PN panel should have a significant impact both on patient management and on antibiotic stewardship.

Citing Articles

The Impact of Pneumonia PCR Panel Testing in the PICU: A Quality Improvement Study.

Fireizen Y, Babbitt C, Adams S, Morphew T, Ferro E, Randhawa I J Pediatr Intensive Care. 2024; 13(4):356-363.

PMID: 39629339 PMC: 11584273. DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1743178.


Utility of a multiplex pathogen detection system directly from respiratory specimens for treatment and diagnostic stewardship.

Srivastava S, Sharad N, Kiro V, Ningombam A, Shrivastava S, Farooque K Microbiol Spectr. 2024; 12(6):e0375923.

PMID: 38712971 PMC: 11237763. DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.03759-23.


Breaking Boundaries in Pneumonia Diagnostics: Transitioning from Tradition to Molecular Frontiers with Multiplex PCR.

Walker A, Timbrook T, Hommel B, Prinzi A Diagnostics (Basel). 2024; 14(7).

PMID: 38611665 PMC: 11012095. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics14070752.


Evaluation of point-of-care multiplex polymerase chain reaction in guiding antibiotic treatment of patients acutely admitted with suspected community-acquired pneumonia in Denmark: A multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Cartuliares M, Rosenvinge F, Mogensen C, Skovsted T, Andersen S, Ostergaard C PLoS Med. 2023; 20(11):e1004314.

PMID: 38015833 PMC: 10684013. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004314.


Diagnostic utility of oropharyngeal swabs as an alternative to lower respiratory tract samples for PCR-based syndromic testing in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

Serigstad S, Knoop S, Markussen D, Ulvestad E, Bjorneklett R, Ebbesen M J Clin Microbiol. 2023; 61(9):e0050523.

PMID: 37585220 PMC: 10512787. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.00505-23.


References
1.
Pournaras S, Sabat A, Grundmann H, Hendrix R, Tsakris A, Friedrich A . Driving Forces of Mechanisms Regulating Oxacillin-Resistance Phenotypes of MRSA: Truly Oxacillin-Susceptible mecA-Positive Staphylococcus aureus Clinical Isolates also Exist. Curr Pharm Des. 2015; 21(16):2048-53. DOI: 10.2174/1381612821666150310103754. View

2.
Choi S, Hong S, Hong H, Kim S, Huh J, Sung H . Usefulness of cellular analysis of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for predicting the etiology of pneumonia in critically ill patients. PLoS One. 2014; 9(5):e97346. PMC: 4019586. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097346. View

3.
Buchan B, Windham S, Balada-Llasat J, Leber A, Harrington A, Relich R . Practical Comparison of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel to Routine Diagnostic Methods and Potential Impact on Antimicrobial Stewardship in Adult Hospitalized Patients with Lower Respiratory Tract Infections. J Clin Microbiol. 2020; 58(7). PMC: 7315039. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00135-20. View

4.
Metlay J, Waterer G, Long A, Anzueto A, Brozek J, Crothers K . Diagnosis and Treatment of Adults with Community-acquired Pneumonia. An Official Clinical Practice Guideline of the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019; 200(7):e45-e67. PMC: 6812437. DOI: 10.1164/rccm.201908-1581ST. View

5.
Aydemir O, Aydemir Y, Ozdemir M . The role of multiplex PCR test in identification of bacterial pathogens in lower respiratory tract infections. Pak J Med Sci. 2014; 30(5):1011-6. PMC: 4163223. DOI: 10.12669/pjms.305.5098. View