Patient predictors of pathogenic versus commensal Gram-positive bacilli organisms isolated from blood cultures

Arjun Sharma, M. Elligsen, Nick Daneman, P. Lam
{"title":"Patient predictors of pathogenic versus commensal Gram-positive bacilli organisms isolated from blood cultures","authors":"Arjun Sharma, M. Elligsen, Nick Daneman, P. Lam","doi":"10.1017/ash.2023.506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective: Gram-positive bacilli represent a diverse species of bacteria that range from commensal flora to pathogens implicated in severe and life-threatening infection. Following the isolation of Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures, the time to species identification may take upward of 24 hours, leaving clinicians to conjecture whether they may represent a contaminant (inadvertent inoculation of commensal flora) or pathogenic organism. In this study, we sought to identify patient variables that could help predict the isolation of contaminant versus pathogenic Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Settings: One quaternary academic medical center affiliated with the University of Toronto. Patients: Adult inpatients were admitted to hospital over a 5-year period (May 2014 to December 2019). Methods: A total of 260 unique Gram-positive bacilli blood culture results from adult inpatients were reviewed and analyzed in both a univariable and multivariable model. Results: Malignancy (aOR 2.78, 95% CI 1.33–5.91, p = 0.007), point increments in the Quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment score for sepsis (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.50–3.47, p < 0.001), peptic ulcer disease (aOR 5.63, 95% CI 1.43–21.0, p = 0.01), and the receipt of immunosuppression prior to a blood culture draw (aOR 3.80, 95% CI 1.86–8.01, p < 0.001) were associated with an increased likelihood of speciating pathogenic Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures such as Clostridium species and Listeria monocytogenes. Conclusion: Such predictors can help supplement a clinician’s assessment on determining when empirical therapy is indicated when faced with Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures and may direct future stewardship interventions for responsible antimicrobial prescribing.","PeriodicalId":7953,"journal":{"name":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","volume":" 71","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antimicrobial Stewardship & Healthcare Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ash.2023.506","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Objective: Gram-positive bacilli represent a diverse species of bacteria that range from commensal flora to pathogens implicated in severe and life-threatening infection. Following the isolation of Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures, the time to species identification may take upward of 24 hours, leaving clinicians to conjecture whether they may represent a contaminant (inadvertent inoculation of commensal flora) or pathogenic organism. In this study, we sought to identify patient variables that could help predict the isolation of contaminant versus pathogenic Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Settings: One quaternary academic medical center affiliated with the University of Toronto. Patients: Adult inpatients were admitted to hospital over a 5-year period (May 2014 to December 2019). Methods: A total of 260 unique Gram-positive bacilli blood culture results from adult inpatients were reviewed and analyzed in both a univariable and multivariable model. Results: Malignancy (aOR 2.78, 95% CI 1.33–5.91, p = 0.007), point increments in the Quick Sepsis Related Organ Failure Assessment score for sepsis (aOR 2.25, 95% CI 1.50–3.47, p < 0.001), peptic ulcer disease (aOR 5.63, 95% CI 1.43–21.0, p = 0.01), and the receipt of immunosuppression prior to a blood culture draw (aOR 3.80, 95% CI 1.86–8.01, p < 0.001) were associated with an increased likelihood of speciating pathogenic Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures such as Clostridium species and Listeria monocytogenes. Conclusion: Such predictors can help supplement a clinician’s assessment on determining when empirical therapy is indicated when faced with Gram-positive bacilli from blood cultures and may direct future stewardship interventions for responsible antimicrobial prescribing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从血液培养物中分离出致病性革兰氏阳性杆菌与共生革兰氏阳性杆菌的患者预测因素
摘要 目的:革兰氏阳性杆菌是细菌中的一种,其种类繁多,既有普通菌群,也有导致严重感染和危及生命的病原体。从血液培养物中分离出革兰氏阳性杆菌后,需要 24 小时才能鉴定出其种类,这让临床医生不得不猜测它们是污染物(不慎接种的共生菌群)还是病原体。在本研究中,我们试图找出有助于预测从血液培养物中分离出污染菌还是致病性革兰氏阳性杆菌的患者变量。设计:回顾性队列研究。研究地点多伦多大学下属的一家四级学术医疗中心。患者:成人住院患者,住院时间为 5 年(2014 年 5 月至 2019 年 12 月)。研究方法通过单变量和多变量模型,对成人住院患者的260份独特革兰氏阳性杆菌血液培养结果进行回顾和分析。结果恶性肿瘤(aOR 2.78,95% CI 1.33-5.91,p = 0.007)、脓毒症快速脓毒症相关器官功能衰竭评估评分增量(aOR 2.25,95% CI 1.50-3.47,p < 0.001)、消化性溃疡病(aOR 5.63,95% CI 1.43-21.0,p = 0.01)和抽血培养前接受免疫抑制(aOR 3.80,95% CI 1.86-8.01,p < 0.001)与从血液培养物中检出致病性革兰氏阳性杆菌(如梭菌和李斯特菌)的可能性增加有关。结论:这些预测因素有助于临床医生在面对血培养物中的革兰氏阳性杆菌时,对何时需要进行经验性治疗的评估进行补充,并可指导未来对负责任的抗菌药物处方进行管理干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Using whole genome sequencing to characterize Clostridioides difficile isolates at a tertiary center in Melbourne, Australia Influenza outbreak management tabletop exercise for congregate living settings Bring it on again: antimicrobial stewardship in transplant infectious diseases: updates and new challenges Professor Mahmood Bhutta on disrupting unhealthy supply chains and promoting environmental sustainability in health care Oral amoxicillin challenges for low-risk penicillin-allergic patients at a large Veterans Affairs facility: a retrospective feasibility analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1