2006
DOI: 10.1128/aac.00658-06
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reactivity of (1→3)-β- d -Glucan Assay with Commonly Used Intravenous Antimicrobials

Abstract: Forty-four intravenous antimicrobials were tested for the presence of (133)-␤-D-glucan (BG). Colistin, ertapenem, cefazolin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, cefotaxime, cefepime, and ampicillin-sulbactam tested positive for BG at reconstituted-vial concentrations but not when diluted to usual maximum plasma concentrations. False-positive BG assays may occur when some antimicrobials are administered; however, this needs to be confirmed.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
70
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 143 publications
(72 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
1
70
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In our study, only 5 (31.2%) of the 16 patients who had a false-positive GM assay due to cross-reaction with ␤-lactams were BG positive, a finding which indicates a lesser degree of cross-reaction of the BG test with these antibiotics. In line with these findings, BG was not detected in vitro at concentrations up to the theoretical maximal plasma concentration for 45 different intravenous antibiotics, including piperacillin-tazobactam (13).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…In our study, only 5 (31.2%) of the 16 patients who had a false-positive GM assay due to cross-reaction with ␤-lactams were BG positive, a finding which indicates a lesser degree of cross-reaction of the BG test with these antibiotics. In line with these findings, BG was not detected in vitro at concentrations up to the theoretical maximal plasma concentration for 45 different intravenous antibiotics, including piperacillin-tazobactam (13).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…Therefore, it is possible that the spectrum of fungal species implicated in this outbreak had an effect on the sensitivity of the assay. False-positive serum BDG results have been reported with a variety of factors, including bacteremia (17), intravenous ␤-lactam antibiotic therapy (18,19), hemodialysis membranes (20,21), gauze packing (22), and intravenous immunoglobulin administration (23). It is possible that these factors may not cause false-positive results with CSF samples due to the blood-brain barrier, leading to increased specificity with CSF samples.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…False positive results may be seen for BDG because it is ubiquitous in the environment. Furthermore, some conditions such as exposure to certain gauzes [25], taking several antibiotics at high concentrations [26], using certain hemodialysis cellulose membranes [27], and receipt of albumin or immunoglobulin products, plasma proteins or coagulation factors [28] may contribute to a greater yield of false positive. False positives by BDG may also be obtained by a variety of other reasons including "bacteremia, hemolysis; intravenous administration of treatment with certain medications; exposure to cotton bandages; heat stroke; and unknown causes" [29,30].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%