Antimicrobial Stewardship Opportunities in Patients with Bacteremia Not Identified by BioFire FilmArray

Abstract

A subset of bacteremia cases are caused by organisms not detected by a rapid-diagnostics platform, BioFire blood culture identification (BCID), with unknown clinical characteristics and outcomes. Patients with ≥1 positive blood culture over a 15-month period were grouped by negative (NB-PC) versus positive (PB-PC) BioFire BCID results and compared with respect to demographics, infection characteristics, antibiotic therapy, and outcomes (length of hospital stay [LOS] and in-hospital mortality). Six percent of 1,044 positive blood cultures were NB-PC. The overall mean age was 65 ± 22 years, 54% of the patients were male, and most were admitted from home; fewer NB-PC had diabetes (19% versus 31%, P = 0.0469), although the intensive care unit admission data were similar. Anaerobes were identified in 57% of the bacteremia cases from the NB-PC group by conventional methods: Bacteroides spp. (30%), Clostridium (11%), and Fusobacterium spp. (8%). Final identification of the NB-PC pathogen was delayed by 2 days (P < 0.01) versus the PB-PC group. The sources of bacteremia were more frequently unknown for the NB-PC group (32% versus 11%, P < 0.01) and of pelvic origin (5% versus 0.1%, P < 0.01) compared to urine (31% versus 9%, P < 0.01) for the PB-PC patients. Fewer NB-PC patients received effective treatment before (68% versus 84%, P = 0.017) and after BCID results (82% versus 96%, P = 0.0048). The median LOS was similar (7 days), but more NB-PC patients died from infection (26% versus 8%, P < 0.01). Our findings affirm the need for the inclusion of anaerobes in BioFire BCID or other rapid diagnostic platforms to facilitate the prompt initiation of effective therapy for bacteremia.