RESUMO
Bloodstream infection remains a major cause of morbidity and death worldwide. Timely and appropriate treatment can reduce mortality among critically ill patients. Current diagnostic methods are too slow to inform precise antibiotic choice, leading to the prescription of empirical antibiotics, which may fail to cover the resistance profile of the pathogen, risking poor patient outcomes. Additionally, overuse of broad-spectrum antibiotics may lead to more resistant organisms, putting further pressure on the dwindling pipeline of antibiotics, and risk transmission of these resistant organisms in the health care environment. Therefore, rapid diagnostics are urgently required to better inform antibiotic choice early in the course of treatment. Sequencing offers great promise in reducing time to microbiological diagnosis; however, the amount of host DNA compared with the pathogen in patient samples presents a significant obstacle. To address this, various host-depletion and bacterial-enrichment strategies have been used in samples, such as saliva, urine, or tissue. However, these methods have yet to be collectively integrated and/or extensively explored for rapid bloodstream infection diagnosis. Although most of these workflows possess individual strengths, their lack of analytical/clinical sensitivity and/or comprehensiveness demands additional improvements or synergistic application. Therefore, this review provides a distinctive classification system for these methods based on their working principles to guide future research, discusses their strengths and limitations, and explores potential avenues for improvement.
RESUMO
Introduction: The BIOFIRE Joint Infection (JI) Panel is a diagnostic tool that uses multiplex-PCR testing to detect microorganisms in synovial fluid specimens from patients suspected of having septic arthritis (SA) on native joints or prosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Methods: A study was conducted across 34 clinical sites in 19 European and Middle Eastern countries from March 2021 to June 2022 to assess the effectiveness of the BIOFIRE JI Panel. Results: A total of 1527 samples were collected from patients suspected of SA or PJI, with an overall agreement of 88.4â¯% and 85â¯% respectively between the JI Panel and synovial fluid cultures (SFCs). The JI Panel detected more positive samples and microorganisms than SFC, with a notable difference on Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus species, Enterococcus faecalis, Kingella kingae, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and anaerobic bacteria. The study found that the BIOFIRE JI Panel has a high utility in the real-world clinical setting for suspected SA and PJI, providing diagnostic results in approximately 1â¯h. The user experience was positive, implying a potential benefit of rapidity of results' turnover in optimising patient management strategies. Conclusion: The study suggests that the BIOFIRE JI Panel could potentially optimise patient management and antimicrobial therapy, thus highlighting its importance in the clinical setting.