Performance evaluation of the FAST™ System and the FAST-PBC Prep™ cartridges for speeded-up positive blood culture testing

Verroken, Alexia; Hajji, Chaima; Bressant, Florian; Couvreur, Jonathan; Anantharajah, Ahalieyah; Rodriguez-Villalobos, Hector

doi:10.3389/fmicb.2022.982650

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study, FAST-DD led to slightly better results (CA of 98.7% for Gram positive and 97.5% for Gram negative) when compared to directly inoculated DD from PBC, which are part of our routine workflow, than the automated method using FAST-MicroScan (CA of 96.1% for both Gram positive and Gram negative). Comparable CA values were previously reported for both Gram-positive [97.4% ( 18 ), 97.7%–100% ( 19 ), and 99.5% ( 20 )] and Gram-negative bacteria [98.5% ( 18 ), 97.8%–99% ( 19 ), and 97.8% ( 20 )] where automated AST systems other than MicroScan WalkAway (i.e., bioMérieux Vitek 2 or BD Phoenix) were utilized. Given these previous studies, our study though is the first to use MicroScan WalkAway demonstrating the compatibility of this automated AST technology with the FAST System.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Regarding the performance of the FAST System in terms of ID, Grinberg and colleagues reported an ID concordance of 94% ( n = 201) using MALDI Biotyper as compared to colonies obtained by subculture ( 18 ). Similarly, Verroken and colleagues reported 89.5% ( n = 266) concordant ID results using the FAST System LC and MALDI Biotyper including 80 blood cultures bottles spiked with multidrug-resistant bacteria ( 19 ). Likewise, Kuo and colleagues demonstrated an accurate ID of 94.1% (272/289) using LC generated by the FAST System and MALDI-TOF MS Microflex ( 20 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…All 54 samples (100%) were correctly identified with the LC suspension. Hence, by using combined prospective and spiked data set, they demonstrated that a wide array of clinically relevant Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria were identifiable using the LC suspension produced by the FAST System ( 19 , 20 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of the Qvella FAST System and the FAST-PBC cartridge for rapid species identification and antimicrobial resistance testing directly from positive blood cultures

Sy,

Bühler,

Becker

et al. 2023

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blood culture diagnostics require rapid and accurate identification (ID) of pathogens and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). Standard procedures, involving conventional cultivation on agar plates, may take up to 48 hours or more until AST completion. Recent approaches aim to shorten the processing time of positive blood cultures (PBC). The FAST System is a new technology, capable of purifying and concentrating bacterial/fungal pathogens from positive blood culture media and producing a bacterial suspension called “liquid colony” (LC), which can be further used in downstream analyses (e.g., ID and AST). Here, we evaluated the performance of the FAST System LC generated from PBC in comparison to our routine workflow including ID by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry using Sepsityper, AST by automatized MicroScan WalkAway plus and directly inoculated disk diffusion (DD), and MICRONAUT-AM for yeast/fungi. A total of 261 samples were analyzed, of which 86.6% (226/261) were eligible for the comparative ID and AST analyses. In comparison to the reference technique (culture-grown colonies), ID concordance of the FAST System LC and Sepsityper was 150/154 (97.4%) and 123/154 (79.9%), respectively, for Gram positive; 67/70 (95.7%) and 64/70 (91.4%), respectively, for Gram negative. For AST, categorical agreement (CA) of the FAST System LC in comparison to the routine workflow for Gram-positive bacteria was 96.1% and 98.7% for MicroScan and DD, respectively. Similar results were obtained for Gram-negative bacteria with 96.6% and 97.5% of CA for MicroScan and DD, respectively. Taken together, the FAST System LC allowed the laboratory to significantly reduce the time to obtain correct ID and AST (automated MicroScan) results 1 day earlier and represents a promising tool to expedite the processing of PBC.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of the Qvella FAST System and the FAST-PBC cartridge for rapid species identification and antimicrobial resistance testing directly from positive blood cultures

Sy,

Bühler,

Becker

et al. 2023

J Clin Microbiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The recently developed FAST system, used here on an experimental basis, allows identification and AST to be performed directly from broth cultures by removing cellular materials, proteins and other interfering substances that may be found in broth. Intended for automated processing of blood culture specimens, the FAST system has yielded promising results in early studies to support clinical use when paired with various downstream identification and AST platforms [13][14][15][16][17]. Prospective studies have found that for positive blood cultures, FAST system processing can be used to rapidly obtain correct organism identifications by MALDI-TOF in 87-96 % of cases, and AST results with ~98 % categorical agreement with standard of care AST [13][14][15][16][17][18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intended for automated processing of blood culture specimens, the FAST system has yielded promising results in early studies to support clinical use when paired with various downstream identification and AST platforms [13][14][15][16][17]. Prospective studies have found that for positive blood cultures, FAST system processing can be used to rapidly obtain correct organism identifications by MALDI-TOF in 87-96 % of cases, and AST results with ~98 % categorical agreement with standard of care AST [13][14][15][16][17][18]. Not only has the FAST system been shown to be highly accurate, it has also been shown by other studies to significantly reduce workflow time [17,18].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rapid diagnostic work-up of Streptococcus dysgalactiae endophthalmitis by a novel culture processing system

Su,

Chang,

Ugaban

et al. 2023

Access Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The diagnosis of infective endophthalmitis is supported by microbiological work-up. Rapid work-up is critical to confirm clinical suspicion and appropriate antimicrobial therapy. We report the novel use of an automated liquid culture processing system (FAST system, Qvella, ON, Canada) in a vitreous fluid culture. A 59-year-old patient with post-operative endophthalmitis presented with acute right eye pain and blurred vision. Vitreous fluid collected for microbiology culture was of limited quantity and only inoculated to thioglycolate broth. The broth recovered beta-haemolytic, group G Streptococcus dysgalactiae susceptible to penicillin and vancomycin. Experimental application of the FAST system to purify the organism from broth culture yielded the same identification and susceptibility test results but 1 day sooner. Despite prompt treatment with appropriate antibiotics, including vancomycin and ceftazidime, disease progressed rapidly and required enucleation to achieve a stable therapeutic outcome. Use of automated processing of monomicrobial broth cultures has thus far focused on positive blood culture broths, but could potentially include other liquid-based cultures such as for sterile body fluids of critical nature.

show abstract

Evolving strategies in microbe identification—a comprehensive review of biochemical, MALDI-TOF MS and molecular testing methods

Arbefeville,

Timbrook,

Garner

2024

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detection and identification of microorganisms are the first steps to guide susceptibility testing and enable clinicians to confirm diseases and guide therapy. The faster the pathogen identification is determined, the quicker the appropriate treatment can be started. In the clinical microbiology laboratory, multiple methodologies can be used to identify organisms, such as traditional biochemical testing or more recent methods like MALDI TOF MS and nucleic acid detection/identification assays. Each of these techniques has advantages and limitations, and clinical laboratories need to determine which methodology is best suited to their particular setting in terms of clinical needs, availability of technical expertise and cost. This article presents a concise review of the history, utilization, advantages and limitations of the main methods used for identifying microorganisms in microbiology laboratories.

show abstract

Performance evaluation of the FAST™ System and the FAST-PBC Prep™ cartridges for speeded-up positive blood culture testing

Abstract: Performance evaluation of the FAST TM System and the FAST-PBC Prep TM cartridges for speeded-up positive blood culture testing.

Cited by 7 publications

References 21 publications

Evaluation of the Qvella FAST System and the FAST-PBC cartridge for rapid species identification and antimicrobial resistance testing directly from positive blood cultures

Evaluation of the Qvella FAST System and the FAST-PBC cartridge for rapid species identification and antimicrobial resistance testing directly from positive blood cultures

Rapid diagnostic work-up of Streptococcus dysgalactiae endophthalmitis by a novel culture processing system

Evolving strategies in microbe identification—a comprehensive review of biochemical, MALDI-TOF MS and molecular testing methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About