Two novel preanalysis sample treatment tools were evaluated in combination with four DNA extraction kits for the selective isolation of bacterial DNA from whole blood. The combination of performing a preanalysis sample treatment and using a larger sample volume increased the detection limit to 50 CFU per ml.

Broad-range real-time PCR and sequencing of the 16S rRNA gene region is a widely known method for the detection and identification of bacteria in clinical samples. However, because of the need for sequencing, such identification of bacteria is time-consuming. The aim of our study was to develop a more rapid 16S real-time PCR-based identification assay using species-or genus-specific probes. The Gram-negative bacteria were divided into Pseudomonas species, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and other Gram-negative species. Within the Gram-positive species, probes were designed for Staphylococcus species, Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus species, Streptococcus species, and Streptococcus pneumoniae. The assay also included a universal probe within the 16S rRNA gene region for the detection of all bacterial DNA. The assay was evaluated with a collection of 248 blood cultures. In this study, the universal probe and the probes targeting Pseudomonas spp., P. aeruginosa, E. coli, Streptococcus spp., S. pneumoniae, Enterococcus spp., and Staphylococcus spp. all had a sensitivity and specificity of 100%. The probe specific for S. aureus showed eight discrepancies, resulting in a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 93%. These data showed high agreement between conventional testing and our novel real-time PCR assay. Furthermore, this assay significantly reduced the time needed for identification. In conclusion, using pathogen-specific probes offers a faster alternative for pathogen detection and could improve the diagnosis of bloodstream infections.

This study validates the presence of antibody reactivity to novel UH-RA peptides in seronegative and early RA. This might reinforce current diagnostics and improve early diagnosis and intervention in RA.

Inadequate therapy in bloodstream infections is suggested to be associated with higher mortality. We evaluated the reduction in inappropriate antibiotic therapy using rapid identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing (FAST) compared to standard of care (SOC) testing in patients with bloodstream infections. The FAST method used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for identification and to detect growth in the presence or absence of antibiotics after only 6 h. For SOC testing, the BD Phoenix system was used. Patients with blood cultures growing Staphylococcus, Streptococcus or Enterococcus species or Gram-negative rods were randomised for FAST or SOC tests. A total of 129 patients were randomised for FAST and 121 patients for the SOC group. At the time SOC results became available, 78 patients in the FAST group could have been switched to more appropriate therapy. Although FAST results were highly accurate (agreement with SOC was 94%), they were only implemented in a minority (16) of patients. However, significantly fewer patients in the FAST group used inappropriate therapy at the time of SOC results (p = 0.025). The time to results in the FAST group was reduced by 15.6 h (p < 0.001). In the patients switched after FAST, this was done after a mean of 42.3 h compared to 61.4 h in those switched after SOC tests (p < 0.001). In bacteraemic patients, FAST resulted in significantly more patients using appropriate antibiotic therapy at the time SOC results were available and 15.6 h earlier than SOC tests. However, the implementation of FAST results was not optimal and no benefit on clinical outcome was shown.

Molecular diagnostics is an increasing popular approach for the direct detection and identification of pathogenic bacteria in clinical samples. Conventional culture techniques are time-consuming and therefore causing a delay in the diagnosis of the patient. Alternative techniques based on nucleic acid amplification offer a shorter turn-around-time and the ability to identify fastidious and non-cultivable organisms. However, molecular detection of bacteria in blood, by for example PCR, RT-PCR, or sequencing of the 16S rDNA genes is often complicated by the presence of PCR-inhibitory compounds. Here we describe several different methods for the extraction of bacterial DNA from whole blood samples. The methods differ regarding costs, hands-on time as well as regarding sensitivity. In combination with a model PCR the detection limits that can be reached using the different methods range from 1,000 to 50 cfu/ml.