Evaluation of the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification Panel on Detection of Pathogenic Microorganisms in Positive Blood Cultures: the First Clinical Report in Japan

Saito, Kyoichi; Endo, Shiro; Katsumi, Makoto; Ishizawa, Chiyuki; Fujikawa, Yuko; Inomata, Shinji; Toyokawa, Masahiro; Kaku, Mitsuo

doi:10.7883/yoken.jjid.2017.414

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar to previous studies [23][24][25][26][27][28][29], we were also able to confirm the reliability of the FA BCID results compared to the laboratory standard of care.…”

Section: Subgroup Of Staphylococcus Aureussupporting

confidence: 88%

The Impact of the FilmArray-Based Detection of Microbial Pathogens from Positive Blood Culture Vials on the Time to Optimal Antimicrobial Regimen in Intensive Care Units of the Helios University Clinic Wuppertal, Germany

Schumann

Johanns

Ahmad-Nejad

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of empirical therapy and time to first effective treatment, including the antimicrobial stewardship program, are decisive in patients presenting with bloodstream infections (BSI). The FilmArray® Blood Culture Identification Panel (FA BCID 1.0) detects 24 bacterial and fungal pathogens as well as 3 resistance genes from positive blood cultures in approximately 70 min. In this paper, we evaluate the impact of the additional FA BCID analysis on the time to an optimal antimicrobial therapy and on the length of stay in the ICU, ICU mortality, and PCT level reduction. This retro-/prospective trial was conducted in BSI patients in the ICU at a German tertiary care hospital. A total of 179 individual patients with 200 episodes of BSI were included in the prospective intervention group, and 150 patients with 170 episodes of BSI in the retrospective control group. In the intervention group, BSI data were analyzed including the MALDI-TOF MS (matrix assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry) and FA BCID results from January 2019 to August 2020; the data from the control group, including the MALDI-TOF results, were collected retrospectively from the year 2018. The effective and appropriate antimicrobial regimen occurred in a median of 17 hours earlier in the intervention versus control group (p = 0.071). Furthermore, changes in the antimicrobial regimens of the intervention group that did not immediately lead to an optimal therapy occurred significantly earlier by a median of 24 hours (p = 0.029). Surrogate markers, indicating an earlier recovery of the patients from the intervention group, such as length of stay at the ICU, duration of mechanical ventilation, or an earlier reduction in PCT level, were not significantly affected. However, mortality did not differ between the patient groups. A postulated reduction of the antimicrobial therapy, in those cases in which coagulase-negative Staphylococcus species were identified, did occur in the control group, but not in the intervention group (p = 0.041). The implementation of FA BCID into the laboratory workflow can improve patient care by optimizing antimicrobial regimen earlier in BSI patients as it provides rapid and accurate results for key pathogens associated with BSI, as well as important antimicrobial resistance markers, e.g., mecA or vanA.

show abstract

“…Similar to previous studies [23][24][25][26][27][28][29], we were also able to confirm the reliability of the FA BCID results compared to the laboratory standard of care.…”

Section: Subgroup Of Staphylococcus Aureussupporting

confidence: 88%

The Impact of the FilmArray-Based Detection of Microbial Pathogens from Positive Blood Culture Vials on the Time to Optimal Antimicrobial Regimen in Intensive Care Units of the Helios University Clinic Wuppertal, Germany

Schumann

Johanns

Ahmad-Nejad

et al. 2021

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All studies used an acceptable reference standard, collected the specimen for both index and reference testing at the same time, used the same reference standard for all patients, and avoided a case‒control study design. In summary, three studies were labelled ‘unclear’ for patient selection [29, 37, 46–48], two studies were labelled ‘high-risk’ for index tests [36, 46], three studies were labelled ‘unclear’ for index tests [29, 38, 49], three studies were labelled ‘unclear’ for reference standards [29, 50, 51], two studies were labelled ‘high-risk’ for flow and timing [29, 48, 52] and six studies were labelled ‘unclear’ for flow and timing [37, 46, 49, 51, 53–55]. Overall, all of the studies had low concern regarding applicability.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…FP, false positive; TP, true positive; Table 1. Continued [29,37,[46][47][48], two studies were labelled 'high-risk' for index tests [36,46], three studies were labelled 'unclear' for index tests [29,38,49], three studies were labelled 'unclear' for reference standards [29,50,51], two studies were labelled 'high-risk' for flow and timing [29,48,52] and six studies were labelled 'unclear' for flow and timing [37,46,49,51,[53][54][55]. Overall, all of the studies had low concern regarding applicability.…”

Section: Quality Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic efficiency of the FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) panel: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yang,

Tao

2023

Journal of Medical Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction. The FilmArray blood culture identification panel (BCID) panel is a multiplex PCR assay with high sensitivity and specificity to identify the most common pathogens in bloodstream infections (BSIs). Hypothesis. We hypothesize that the BCID panel has good diagnostic performance for BSIs and can be popularized in clinical application. Aim: To provide summarized evidence for the diagnostic accuracy of the BCID panel for the identification of positive blood cultures. Methodology. We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases through March 2021 and assessed the efficacy of the diagnostic test of the BCID panel. We performed a meta-analysis and calculated the summary sensitivity and specificity of the BCID panel. Systematic review protocols were registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) (registration number CRD42021239176). Results. A total of 16 full-text articles were eligible for analysis. The overall sensitivities of the BCID panel on Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria and fungi were 97 % (95 % CI, 0.96–0.98), 100 % (95 % CI, 0.98–01.00) and 99 % (95 % CI, 0.87–1.00), respectively. The pooled diagnostic specificities were 99 % (95 % CI, 0.97–1.00), 100 % (95 % CI, 1.00–1.00) and 100 % (95 % CI, 1.00–1.00) for Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria and fungi, respectively. Conclusions. The BCID panel has high rule-in value for the early detection of BSI patients. The BCID panel can still provide valuable information for ruling out bacteremia or fungemia in populations with low pretest probability.

show abstract

“…One study contained 2207 samples (1568 clinical samples and 639 seeded positive blood cultures) from eight centers [ 14 ]. Other than that, most of the previous studies included between 54 and 206 samples [ 13 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. We compared our study to the Salimnia et al study, which utilized a large number of samples to evaluate microorganism identification agreement rates [ 14 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It should be noted that both studies showed discrepancies in additionally detected yeast cases. Studies that used BCID panels with small sample sizes reported detection rates ranging from 80.4% to 91.6% for all organisms in clinical performance (94.6–99.3% for the on-target organisms in the BCID panel) [ 13 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Compared with these papers, the number of clinical samples analyzed in 2005 positive blood culture bottles in our research was sufficiently large.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Large-Scale Clinical Evaluation of Rapid Blood Culture Identification Panels for Bloodstream Infections at a Tertiary Hospital

Kim

Chung

et al. 2023

Diagnostics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prompt implementation of optimal antibacterial therapy through the rapid identification of the causative organisms is essential for improving outcomes for critically ill patients with bloodstream infections. We evaluated the clinical performance of the FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) panel for rapidly identifying causative pathogens in the bloodstream using large-scale clinical samples. We analyzed the results of identification using a BCID panel performed on 2005 positive blood culture bottles from September 2019 to June 2022. Pathogen detection efficiency and interval from Gram staining to identification using the BCID panel were compared to those of conventional identification systems—VITEK MS MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometer and Vitek2—and antibiotic susceptibility testing—Vitek2. We detected 2167 isolates from 2005 positive blood culture bottles. In these isolates, the BCID panel showed 93% full agreement—both organisms and antimicrobial resistance genes were matched, and no off-target organisms were detected. Species-level discordance was found in 0.6% of tests. Sixty-five isolates (3.0%) were only detected by BCID, whereas 22 isolates (1.0%) from the on-target panel were not detected by BCID. This large-scale study demonstrated that the BCID panel was a reliable and rapid identification method for directly identifying bloodstream pathogens in a positive blood culture.

show abstract

Evaluation of the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification Panel on Detection of Pathogenic Microorganisms in Positive Blood Cultures: the First Clinical Report in Japan

Cited by 7 publications

References 12 publications

The Impact of the FilmArray-Based Detection of Microbial Pathogens from Positive Blood Culture Vials on the Time to Optimal Antimicrobial Regimen in Intensive Care Units of the Helios University Clinic Wuppertal, Germany

The Impact of the FilmArray-Based Detection of Microbial Pathogens from Positive Blood Culture Vials on the Time to Optimal Antimicrobial Regimen in Intensive Care Units of the Helios University Clinic Wuppertal, Germany

Diagnostic efficiency of the FilmArray blood culture identification (BCID) panel: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Large-Scale Clinical Evaluation of Rapid Blood Culture Identification Panels for Bloodstream Infections at a Tertiary Hospital

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About