Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros

Base de datos
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Infect Dis ; 229(1): 214-222, 2024 Jan 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37369370

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Inability to identify the microbial etiology of lower respiratory tract infection leads to unnecessary antibiotic use. We evaluated the utility of the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BioFire PN) to inform microbiologic diagnosis. METHODS: Hospitalized adults with respiratory illness were recruited; sputa and clinical/laboratory data were collected. Sputa were cultured for bacteria and tested with BioFire PN. Microbial etiology was adjudicated by 4 physicians. Bacterial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was compared with culture and clinical adjudication. RESULTS: Of 298 sputa tested, BioFire PN detected significantly more pathogens (350 bacteria, 16 atypicals, and 164 viruses) than sputum culture plus any standard-of-care testing (91% vs 60%, P < .0001). When compared with culture, the sensitivity of BioFire PN for individual bacteria was 46% to 100%; specificity, 61% to 100%; and negative predictive value, 92% to 100%. Cases were adjudicated as viral (n = 58) and bacterial (n = 100). PCR detected bacteria in 55% of viral cases and 95% of bacterial (P < .0001). High serum procalcitonin and bacterial adjudication were more often associated with sputa with 106 or 107 copies detected. CONCLUSIONS: Multiplex PCR testing of sputa for bacteria is useful to rule out bacterial infection with added value to detect viruses and atypical bacteria.


Asunto(s)
Neumonía , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio , Virus , Adulto , Humanos , Bacterias/genética , Virus/genética , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa Multiplex , Neumonía/diagnóstico
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA