Recommendations Regarding Use of Rapid Blood Pathogen Identification Panel Data

Similar documents
Mercy Medical Center Des Moines, Iowa Department of Pathology. Microbiology Department Antibiotic Susceptibility January December 2016

CONTAGIOUS COMMENTS Department of Epidemiology

INFECTIOUS DISEASES DIAGNOSTIC LABORATORY NEWSLETTER

Concise Antibiogram Toolkit Background

Guidelines for Laboratory Verification of Performance of the FilmArray BCID System

Aberdeen Hospital. Antibiotic Susceptibility Patterns For Commonly Isolated Organisms For 2015

2017 Antibiogram. Central Zone. Alberta Health Services. including. Red Deer Regional Hospital. St. Mary s Hospital, Camrose

2015 Antibiogram. Red Deer Regional Hospital. Central Zone. Alberta Health Services

Table 1. Commonly encountered or important organisms and their usual antimicrobial susceptibilities.

2016 Antibiogram. Central Zone. Alberta Health Services. including. Red Deer Regional Hospital. St. Mary s Hospital, Camrose

CONTAGIOUS COMMENTS Department of Epidemiology

2012 ANTIBIOGRAM. Central Zone Former DTHR Sites. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: Advanced Course

2015 Antibiotic Susceptibility Report

2016 Antibiotic Susceptibility Report

2010 ANTIBIOGRAM. University of Alberta Hospital and the Stollery Children s Hospital

CONTAGIOUS COMMENTS Department of Epidemiology

Liofilchem. ID-AST systems

BACTERIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY REPORT: 2016 (January 2016 December 2016)

2009 ANTIBIOGRAM. University of Alberta Hospital and the Stollery Childrens Hospital

C&W Three-Year Cumulative Antibiogram January 2013 December 2015

4 th and 5 th generation cephalosporins. Naderi HR Associate professor of Infectious Diseases

microbiology testing services

Antibiotic. Antibiotic Classes, Spectrum of Activity & Antibiotic Reporting

Understanding the Hospital Antibiogram

Northwestern Medicine Central DuPage Hospital Antimicrobial Criteria Updated 11/16/16

Appropriate antimicrobial therapy in HAP: What does this mean?

Childrens Hospital Antibiogram for 2012 (Based on data from 2011)

CUMULATIVE ANTIBIOGRAM

Antibiotic Stewardship Program (ASP) CHRISTUS SETX

OCTOBER 7-10 PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

RAPID IDENTIFICATION OF RESISTANCE MECHANISMS

The β- Lactam Antibiotics. Munir Gharaibeh MD, PhD, MHPE School of Medicine, The University of Jordan November 2018

5/4/2018. Multidrug Resistant Organisms (MDROs) Objectives. Outline. Define a multi-drug resistant organism (MDRO)

CARBAPENEM RESISTANT ENTEROBACTERIACEAE (KPC CRE)

New Drugs for Bad Bugs- Statewide Antibiogram

Principles of Infectious Disease. Dr. Ezra Levy CSUHS PA Program

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Summary 2012

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Summary 2011

SHC Clinical Pathway: HAP/VAP Flowchart

Antimicrobial susceptibility

RCH antibiotic susceptibility data

Leveraging the Lab and Microbiology Department to Optimize Stewardship

UNDERSTANDING THE ANTIBIOGRAM

UNDERSTANDING YOUR DATA: THE ANTIBIOGRAM

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Urine - Gram Positive Susceptibility Reporting 1 Staphylococcus species, MRSA...11

THE NAC CHALLENGE PANEL OF ISOLATES FOR VERIFICATION OF ANTIBIOTIC SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING METHODS

Interactive session: adapting to antibiogram. Thong Phe Heng Vengchhun Felix Leclerc Erika Vlieghe

QUICK REFERENCE. Pseudomonas aeruginosa. (Pseudomonas sp. Xantomonas maltophilia, Acinetobacter sp. & Flavomonas sp.)

Drug Class Prior Authorization Criteria Intravenous Antibiotics

Help with moving disc diffusion methods from BSAC to EUCAST. Media BSAC EUCAST

Antimicrobial Therapy

What s next in the antibiotic pipeline?

Preserve the Power of Antibiotics

PRACTIC GUIDELINES for APPROPRIATE ANTIBIOTICS USE

Central Nervous System Infections

SYMMETRY FOAMING HAND SANITIZER with Aloe & Vitamin E Technical Data

Fundamental Concepts in the Use of Antibiotics. Case. Case. TM is a 24 year old male admitted to ICU after TBI and leg fracture from MVA ICU day 3

9/30/2016. Dr. Janell Mayer, Pharm.D., CGP, BCPS Dr. Lindsey Votaw, Pharm.D., CGP, BCPS

BactiReg3 Event Notes Module Page(s) 4-9 (TUL) Page 1 of 21

Vitek QC Sets. Vitek 2 Identification QC Sets

* gender factor (male=1, female=0.85)

Bad Bugs. Pharmacist Learning Objectives. Antimicrobial Resistance. Patient Case. Pharmacy Technician Learning Objectives 4/8/2016

Suggestions for appropriate agents to include in routine antimicrobial susceptibility testing

Intrinsic, implied and default resistance

MicroScan LabPro Information Manager

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Patterns

Antibacterial Resistance In Wales

Study Type of PCR Primers Identified microorganisms

HOSPITAL-ACQUIRED INFECTIONS AND QASM PATIENTS

MICRONAUT MICRONAUT-S Detection of Resistance Mechanisms. Innovation with Integrity BMD MIC

Liofilchem Chromatic Chromogenic culture media for microbial identification and for the screening of antimicrobial resistance mechanisms

Antimicrobial Stewardship:

INCIDENCE OF BACTERIAL COLONISATION IN HOSPITALISED PATIENTS WITH DRUG-RESISTANT TUBERCULOSIS

Infectious Disease: Drug Resistance Pattern in New Mexico

Policy # MI_AST Department of Microbiology. Page Quality Manual

European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

4/3/2017 CLINICAL PEARLS: UPDATES IN THE MANAGEMENT OF NOSOCOMIAL PNEUMONIA DISCLOSURE LEARNING OBJECTIVES

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: The Basics

LEARNING OBJECTIVES ANTIMICROBIAL USES AND ABUSES INFECTIOUS DISEASE SCARES

Antibiotic Resistance. Antibiotic Resistance: A Growing Concern. Antibiotic resistance is not new 3/21/2011

CF WELL Pharmacology: Microbiology & Antibiotics

10/11/2017. Objectives. Case #1

Solution Title: Antibiotic Stewardship: A Journey Toward the Triple Aim

Appropriate Management of Common Pediatric Infections. Blaise L. Congeni M.D. Akron Children s Hospital Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases

General Approach to Infectious Diseases

CONTAGIOUS COMMENTS Department of Epidemiology

Antimicrobial Resistance Advisory Workgroup (ARAW) Members

Workshop Summary and Action Items

Advanced Practice Education Associates. Antibiotics

Antimicrobial Stewardship Program

EUCAST recommended strains for internal quality control

Educating Clinical and Public Health Laboratories About Antimicrobial Resistance Challenges

PIPERACILLIN- TAZOBACTAM INJECTION - SUPPLY PROBLEMS

Non-Susceptibility of Bacterial Pathogens Causing Hospital-Onset Pneumonia UK and Ireland,

European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing

Approach to pediatric Antibiotics

DISCLAIMER: ECHO Nevada emphasizes patient privacy and asks participants to not share ANY Protected Health Information during ECHO clinics.

Principles of Antibiotics Use & Spectrum of Some

ANTIMICROBIAL RESISTANCE SURVEILLANCE FROM SENTINEL PUBLIC HOSPITALS, SOUTH AFRICA, 2014

Transcription:

Recommendations Regarding Use of Rapid Blood Pathogen Identification Panel Data Trevor Van Schooneveld MD, Scott Bergman, PharmD, BCPS, Paul Fey, PhD, Mark Rupp, MD The Clinical Microbiology laboratory at Nebraska Medicine utilizes an FDA approved test called the Blood Pathogen Panel (BPP, performed on the BioFire BCID instrument). This test uses a PCR-based approach to amplify DNA targets directly from positive blood cultures allowing rapid identification of pathogens and earlier transition to most appropriate therapy. This test identifies 21 different Gramnegative, Gram-positive, and yeast pathogens (Table 1). It also detects the genes responsible for vancomycin-resistance in Enterococci, methicillin-resistance in Staphylococci, and one of the genes responsible for carbapenem-resistance in the Enterobacteriaceae. In addition to multiple species specific assays, the panel also has 4 genus specific assays which allows detection of pathogens for which there are not specific targets (i.e. Citrobacter, Salmonella, etc.). Information regarding which species are detected by these assays is listed in Table 4. Table 1: List of Pathogens and Resistance Genes Detected: Gram-positive Bacteria Gram-Negative Bacteria Yeast Resistance Gene Enterococcus genus Listeria monocytogenes Staphylococcus genus Staphylococcus aureus Streptococcus genus Streptococcus agalactiae Streptococcus pneumoniae Streptococcus pyogenes Acinetobacter baumannii Enterobacteriaceae family Enterobacter cloacae complex Escherichia coli Klebsiella oxytoca Klebsiella pneumonia Proteus spp Serratia marcescens Haemophilus influenzae Neisseria meningitidis Pseudomonas aeruginosa Candida albicans C. glabrata C. krusei C. parapsilosis C. tropicalis meca = methicillin (oxacillin) resistance vana/b = vancomycin resistance kpc = carbapenem resistance The microbiology lab notifies clinicians of positive blood culture Gram-stain results immediately after they are performed. They then perform the BPP and results are typically available within One Chart in <2 hours. The rapid reporting of this data allows for early adjustment of antimicrobials to the most appropriate therapy. A list of recommended antibiotic treatment choices are outlined in Table 2. The Antimicrobial Stewardship Team based on an analysis of the institutional antibiogram developed these recommendations. Relevant information on susceptibility is provided for gram-negative pathogens where the activity of agents is variable. When blood culture Gram-stain and BPP results are known,

current antimicrobial therapy should be evaluated in light of the clinical picture and adjusted to the most appropriate single agent if possible. In addition, when full susceptibility results become available therapy should be adjusted to the most narrow spectrum appropriate agent. Implementation of the BPP at NM resulted in earlier implementation of active therapy (6 hours earlier) and more rapid transition to the most narrow spectrum effective therapy (12 hours earlier). Other studies have shown that rapid pathogen identification can result in shorter hospital stays and improved clinical outcomes. The utility and cost-effectiveness of such testing is dependent upon clinicians reacting to the data. The antimicrobial stewardship team currently reviews this data during business hours and contacts the treating team if they feel adjustments in therapy are needed, but it is strongly recommended that this data be utilized in making treatment decisions at the time it is available. Certain infections are often polymicrobial in nature and the isolation of a single pathogen from the blood culture, while allowing narrowing of therapy, should not result in over-narrowing. An example would be a complicated intra-abdominal infections where anaerobes are frequently present and therapy active against these pathogens should generally be included until definitive cultures of the site of infection have returned. Final pathogen susceptibilities are usually in 24-72 hours and should always be reviewed to determine if therapy adjustments should be made.

Table 2: Blood Pathogen Panel Results and Recommended Therapy Use this table to select the most appropriate empiric therapy for treating a blood stream infection (BSI). Patients who responded to a narrow spectrum agent do not need to be escalated, even if this guideline recommends a broader spectrum agent and can usually be safely continued on current therapy. Patients who have not clinically responded to initial therapy (persistent fever, lack of improvement, etc.) should have therapy adjusted to a more active regimen based on the guideline. Allergies, organ dysfunction, and history of antimicrobial resistance should be considered when choosing therapy. Data on susceptibility for various gram-negative pathogens was derived from the 2016 institutional antibiograms including a bloodstream infection specific antibiogram (see Table 3). Pathogen Detected Preferred Therapy Comments (susceptibility data from 2016) Enterococcus genus van A/B negative van A/B positive = VRE Staphylococcus aureus meca negative = MSSA Vancomycin 15 mg/kg Q12h Linezolid 600mg q12h Oxacillin 2g q4h Linezolid slightly more active in VRE Linezolid 89-94% susceptible (89% Daptomycin 87-90% susceptible (90% Cefazolin 2g q8h is an alternative meca positive = MRSA Staphylococcus genus with negative S. aureus PCR Blood Culture (Bcx) result: 1 of 2 BCX positive 2 of 2 BCX positive meca negative meca positive Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A Strep) and Streptococcus agalactiae (Group B Strep) Streptococcus pneumoniae Source of Infection: Pneumonia CNS Infection Vancomycin 15 mg/kg Q12h Consider withholding or discontinuing therapy as likely contaminant, do not need to routinely draw repeat BCX Oxacillin 2g q4h Vancomycin 15 mg/kg Q12h Penicillin 3 million units q4h or Ampicillin 2g IV q4h or Cefazolin 2g IV Q8h Penicillin 3 million units q4h or Ampicillin 2g IV q4h Ceftriaxone 2g q12h + Vancomycin 15 mg/kg Q12h Daptomycin is an alternative to vancomycin In severely ill patients consider starting/continuing therapy until more definitive results return Cefazolin 2g q8h is an alternative Beta-hemolytic strep are routinely susceptible to penicillin Vancomycin in severe beta-lactam allergy Continue vancomycin until susceptibilities return

Streptococcus genus Blood Culture result: 1 of 2 BCX positive Consider with-holding or discontinuing therapy as likely contaminant In severely ill patients consider starting/continuing therapy until more definitive results return 2 of 2 BCX positive Ceftriaxone 2g q24h Listeria monocytogenes Ampicillin 2g q4h TMP/SMX in patients with severe betalactam allergy Acinetobacter baumannii Meropenem 500mg 6h +/- amikacin No beta-lactam with >90% activity 15mg/kg daily Meropenem 83% susceptible Cefepime 75% susceptible E. coli Community-onset (CO): Ceftriaxone 2g q24 OR Piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g q8h (consider with history of resistance, recurrent UTI, recent FQ exposure, or recent hospital stay) Nosocomial-onset (NO): Piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g q8h OR Ertapenem 1g q24h Consider addition of amikacin in severely ill or non-responding Ceftriaxone: 86-96% susceptible 91-96% CO susceptible (91% 78-89% NO susceptible (78% Pip/tazo: 94-98% susceptible 95-98% CO susceptible (97% 64-95% NO susceptible (94% Cefepime: 78-97% susceptible 92-97% CO susceptible (92% 78-92% NO susceptible (78% Levofloxacin: 69-84% susceptible (75% 80-84% CO susceptible 69-74% NO susceptible Ertapenem: 100% susceptible Klebsiella pneumoniae Klebsiella oxytoca Community-onset: Ceftriaxone 2g q24h Nosocomial: Piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g q8h OR Ertapenem 1g q24h Community-onset: Cefepime 1g q6h Nosocomial-onset: Ertapenem 1g q24h Ceftriaxone: 92-96% susceptible (92-94% 92-98% CO susceptible 88-92% NO susceptible Pip/tazo: 92-97% susceptible (92-98% Levofloxacin: 95-100% susceptible (99% Ertapenem: 99-100% susceptible (100% Cefepime:85-97% susceptible(94% 97% CO susceptible 85% NO susceptible Levofloxacin: 90-100% susceptible (100% Ertapenem: 99-100% susceptible (100% Pip/tazo: 80-90% susceptible (90%

Serratia marcescens Cefepime 1g q6h Cefepime: 91-96% susceptible Levofloxacin: 97-100% susceptible Ertapenem: 97-100% susceptible Enterobacter cloacae Merepenem 500mg Q6h Meropenem: 100% susceptible Levofloxacin: 97-99% susceptible Cefepime: 78-87% susceptible (87% Ertapenem: 79-86% susceptible (87% Pip/tazo: 73-85% susceptible (85% Proteus spp Ceftriaxone 2g q24h 97-100% susceptible(100% Enterobacteriaceae family only (See list of potential pathogens in Piperacillin/tazobactam, cefepime, or ertapenem If on combination therapy (FQ or AG) with pip/tazo, cefepime, or carbapenem consider stopping non-beta lactam agent as all have excellent activity Table 4) Pseudomonas aeruginosa Piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g q8h infused over 4h +/- tobramycin 7 mg/kg daily No beta-lactam with >90% activity Pip/tazo: 82-89% susceptible (82% Meropenem: 77-86% susceptible(86% Cefepime: 80-83% susceptible(83% Neisseria meningitidis Haemophilus influenzae Candida albicans Penicillin 4 million units q4h or Ceftriaxone 2g q12h Ampicillin/sulbactam 3g q6h or Ceftriaxone 2g q24h or Fluconazole 800mg load, 400mg daily Candida glabrata Micafungin 100mg q24h 99% susceptible Candida krusei Micafungin 100mg q24h 100% susceptible Candida parapsiolosis Fluconazole 800mg load, 400mg daily Consider tobramycin addition in severely ill or non-responding patients 93% susceptible, 3% susceptible dosedependent Consider high dose fluconazole (1600mg load, 800mg daily) if previous azole exposure 91% susceptible, 6% susceptible-dose dependent Consider high dose fluconazole (1600mg load, 800mg daily) if previous azole exposure Candida tropicalis Micafungin100mg q24h 100% susceptible meca gene Vancomycin 15 mg/kg Q12h Marker for methicillin-resistant Staphylococci (i.e. = MRSA) van A/B gene Linezolid 600mg q12h Marker for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (i.e.= VRE)

kpc gene Consult ID Ceftazidime/avibactam (nonformulary) + Colistin +/- Tigecycline Marker for carbapenem resistant Enterobacteriaceae (i.e. = CRE) Table 3: NM Bloodstream Infection Antibiogram 2016 Antibiogram generated using only positive blood cultures. Enterobacter cloacae (N=60) E. coli (N=379) Klebsiella oxytoca (N=31) Klebsiella pneumoniae (N=136) Proteus mirabilis (N=31) Serratia marcesces (N=116) Pseudomonas aeruginosa (N=72) Amp/Sul 26.7% 48.8% 64.5% 80.1% 90.3% 13% XXX Pip/tazo 85% 94.5% 90.3% 64.9% 100.00% 74% 81.9% Cefuroxime 33.3% 82.3% 80.6% 83.8% 96.8% XXX XXX Ceftazidime 57.1% 86.0% 93.5% 93.9% 100.00% XXX 87.5% Ceftriaxone 63.3% 85.8% 90.3% 94.1% 100% 63% XXX Cefepime 86.7% 88.1% 93.5% 93.4% 100% 92% 83.3% Aztreonam 80% 86% 87.1% 94.1% 90.3% 66% 70.8% Ertapenem 86.7% 99.2% 100% 99.3% 100.00% 98% XXX Meropenem 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 98% 86.1% Levofloxacin 98.3% 74.9% 100% 99.3% 71% 98% 72.2% TMP/SMX 90.0%% 66.8% 96.8% 86% 64.5% 96% XXX Gentamicin 95% 84.4% 96.8% 96.3% 80.6% 97% 84.7% Tobramycin 98.3% 84.4% 96.8% 93.4% 80.6% 93% 97.2% Amikacin 100% 99.5% 100% 100% 100% 99% 95.8% Streptococcus pneumoniae (N=53) Streptococcus. viridans group (N=78-98) Enterococcus faecalis (N=107) Enterococcus faecium (N=78) PCN Non-meningitis 100% 67.3% 100% XXX PCN Meningitis 73.2% XXX XXX XXX Ampicillin 100% 67.3% 100% 12.8% Ceftriaxone Non-meningitis 100% 94.8% XXX XXX Ceftriaxone Meningitis 94.6% XXX XXX XXX Meropenem 89.3% 100% XXX XXX Vancomycin 100% 100% 100% 23.1% Azithromycin 62.3% 50% 34.6% 6.4% Clindamycin 94.2% 91% XXX XXX Levofloxacin 100% 80.6% 81.3% 9% Daptomycin XXX XXX 100% 89.7% Linezolid XXX XXX 91.6% 88.5%

Table 4: Pathogens Detected by BPP Genus Specific Assay Enterococcus genus Staphylococcus genus Streptococcus genus Designed to detect multiple Viridans group species and non-group A/B betahemolytic streptococci Pathogens Detected E. faecium E. faecalis E. avium E. casseliflavus E. durans E. gallinarum E. hirae E. dispar (reduced sensitivity) E. saccharolyticus (reduced sensitivity) S. aureus S. caprae S. cohnii S. epidermidis S. haemolyticus S. hominis S. lugdunensis S. xylosus S. capitis (reduced sensitivity) S. pasteuri (reduced sensitivity) S. saprophyticus (reduced sensitivity) S. simulans (reduced sensitivity) S. warneri (reduced sensitivity) S. anginosus S. bovis S. constellatus S. dysgalactiae S. equinus S. gallolyticus S. gordonii S. intermedius S. mitis S. mutans S. oralis S. parasanguinis S. pseudopneumoniae S. salivarius S. sanguinis Pathogens Not Detected E. raffinosus S. auricularis S. carnosus S. lentus S. pettenkoferi S. pseudointermedius S. schleiferi S. sciuri

Enterobacteriaceae Designed to detect less common Enterobacteriaceae Cedeceae spp. Citrobacter spp. Cronobacter spp. Enterobacter spp. Escherichia spp. Klebsiella spp. Kluyvera spp. Leclercia adecarboxylata Proteus spp. Raoultella spp. Salmonella spp. Shigella spp. Serratia marcescens Serratia ficaria Serratia entomophila Yokenella regensbergei Edwardsiella spp. (reduced sensitivity) Enterobacter gergoviae (reduced sensitivity) Hafnia alvei (reduced sensitivity) Pantoea spp. (reduced sensitivity) Salmonella bongori (reduced sensitivity) Serratia fonticola (reduced sensitivity) Serratia odorifera (reduced sensitivity) Serratia rubidaeae (reduced sensitivity) Morganella morganii Providencia spp. Rahnella spp Serratia liquefaciens Serratia plymuthica Tatumella ptyseos Yersinia enterocolitica

Table 5: FDA data The following table outlines the cumulative data from the BioFire BCID FDA trial comparing BCID results to standard culture that was utilized for approval. A number of studies have been published regarding the sensitivity and specificity of the BPP suggesting the test is highly accurate. One area the BPP may suffer from decreased accuracy is in patients with polymicrobial BSI. Whenever multiple pathogens are noted on the gram stain or detected by the BPP results should be interpreted with caution as they can be both falsely positive and/or negative. Analyte Prospective Blood Cultures Sensitivity Specificity Antimicrobial Resistance Genes meca (reported with Staphylococcus) 98.4% 98.3% vana/b (reported with Enterococcus) 100% 100% KPC (reported with Enterobacteriaceae, A. baumannii, and P. aeruginosa) 100% 100% Gram-Positive Enterococcus 97.7% 99.8% Listeria monocytogenes 100% 100% Staphylococcus a 96.5% 99.1% Staphylococcus aureus 98.40% 99.80% Streptococcus a 97.50% 99.80% Streptococcus agalactiae (Group B) 100% 100% Streptococcus pneumoniae 97.30% 99.9% Streptococcus pyogenes (Group A) 100% 99.9% Gram-Negative Acinetobacter baumannii 100% 99.8% Enterobacteriaceaea 98.4% 99.8% Enterobacter cloacae complex 97.4% 99.9% Escherichia coli 98.0% 99.8% Klebsiella oxytoca 92.2% 99.9% Klebsiella pneumoniae 97.1% 99.6% Proteus 100% 100% Serratia marcescens 98.7% 99.9% Haemophilus influenzae 100% 100% Neisseria meningitidis 100% 100% Pseudomonas aeruginosa 98.1% 99.9% Yeast Candida albicans 100% 99.8% Candida glabrata 100% 99.9% Candida krusei 100% 100% Candida parapsilosis 96.7% 99.9% Candida tropicalis 100% 100% Updated: June 2017