Investigating the time to blood culture positivity: why does it take so long?

Kerry Falconer, Robert Hammond, Benjamin J Parcell, Stephen H Gillespie
{"title":"Investigating the time to blood culture positivity: why does it take so long?","authors":"Kerry Falconer, Robert Hammond, Benjamin J Parcell, Stephen H Gillespie","doi":"10.1099/jmm.0.001942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Introduction.</b> Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are one of the most serious infections investigated by microbiologists. However, the time to detect a BSI fails to meet the rapidity required to inform clinical decisions in real time.<b>Gap Statement.</b> Blood culture (BC) is considered the gold standard for diagnosing bloodstream infections. However, the time to blood culture positivity can be lengthy. Underpinning this is the reliance on bacteria replicating to a high concentration, which is necessary for the detection using routine blood culture systems. To improve the diagnosis and management of patients with BSIs, more sensitive detection methods are required.<b>Aim.</b> The study aimed to answer key questions addressing the delay in BSI detection and whether the time to BSI detection could be expedited using a Scattered Light Integrated Collection (SLIC) device.<b>Methodology.</b> A proof-of-concept study was conducted to compare the time to positivity (TTP) of Gram-negative BCs flagging positive on BacT/ALERT with an SLIC device. An SLIC device was utilized to compare the TTP of the most prevalent BSI pathogens derived from nutrient broth and BC, the influence of bacterial load on TTP and the TTP directly from whole blood. Additionally, the overall turnaround time (TAT) of SLIC was compared with that of a standard hospital workflow.<b>Results.</b> Most pathogens tested took significantly longer to replicate when derived from BC than from nutrient medium. The median TTP of Gram-negative BC on BacT/ALERT was 13.56 h with a median bacterial load of 6.4×10<sup>9</sup> c.f.u. ml<sup>-1</sup>. All pathogens (7/7) derived from BC at a concentration of 10<sup>5</sup> c.f.u. ml<sup>-1</sup> were detectable in under 70 min on SLIC. Decreasing <i>Escherichia coli</i> BC concentration from 10<sup>5</sup> to 10<sup>2</sup> c.f.u. ml<sup>-1</sup> increased the TTP of SLIC from 15 to 85 min. Direct BSI detection from whole blood on SLIC demonstrated a 76% reduction in TAT when compared with the standard hospital workflow.<b>Conclusion.</b> An SLIC device significantly reduced the TTP of common BSI pathogens. The application of this technology could have a major impact on the detection and management of BSI.</p>","PeriodicalId":94093,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical microbiology","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of medical microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001942","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

Introduction. Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are one of the most serious infections investigated by microbiologists. However, the time to detect a BSI fails to meet the rapidity required to inform clinical decisions in real time.Gap Statement. Blood culture (BC) is considered the gold standard for diagnosing bloodstream infections. However, the time to blood culture positivity can be lengthy. Underpinning this is the reliance on bacteria replicating to a high concentration, which is necessary for the detection using routine blood culture systems. To improve the diagnosis and management of patients with BSIs, more sensitive detection methods are required.Aim. The study aimed to answer key questions addressing the delay in BSI detection and whether the time to BSI detection could be expedited using a Scattered Light Integrated Collection (SLIC) device.Methodology. A proof-of-concept study was conducted to compare the time to positivity (TTP) of Gram-negative BCs flagging positive on BacT/ALERT with an SLIC device. An SLIC device was utilized to compare the TTP of the most prevalent BSI pathogens derived from nutrient broth and BC, the influence of bacterial load on TTP and the TTP directly from whole blood. Additionally, the overall turnaround time (TAT) of SLIC was compared with that of a standard hospital workflow.Results. Most pathogens tested took significantly longer to replicate when derived from BC than from nutrient medium. The median TTP of Gram-negative BC on BacT/ALERT was 13.56 h with a median bacterial load of 6.4×109 c.f.u. ml-1. All pathogens (7/7) derived from BC at a concentration of 105 c.f.u. ml-1 were detectable in under 70 min on SLIC. Decreasing Escherichia coli BC concentration from 105 to 102 c.f.u. ml-1 increased the TTP of SLIC from 15 to 85 min. Direct BSI detection from whole blood on SLIC demonstrated a 76% reduction in TAT when compared with the standard hospital workflow.Conclusion. An SLIC device significantly reduced the TTP of common BSI pathogens. The application of this technology could have a major impact on the detection and management of BSI.

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
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
Altered gut microbial profiles in drug-treated rats with alcoholic heart disease. Import of global high-risk clones is the primary driver of carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Norway. Investigating the time to blood culture positivity: why does it take so long? Comparison of the bacterial microbiome in the pharynx and nasal cavity of persistent, intermittent carriers and non-carriers of Staphylococcus aureus. Diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection and impact of testing.
×
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