RESUMEN
Background: Nosocomial transmission and outbreaks of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) represent a challenge to healthcare systems. In July 2018, a CPE hospital ward outbreak was declared. Our aim was to investigate transmission patterns, using social network analysis and genomics in a nosocomial CPE outbreak. Methods: A retrospective descriptive analysis of all patients (cases and contacts) admitted to a ward experiencing a CPE outbreak (2018-2019) was undertaken. A case had a negative CPE admission screen, and subsequent positive test. A contact shared a multi-bed area and/or facility with a case (>4 hours). Social networks, including genomics data and ward locations, were constructed. Network metrics were analysed. Findings: Forty-five cases and 844 contacts were analysed. The median age of cases was 78 years (IQR 67-83), 58% (n=26) were male and 100% had co-morbidities. The median outbreak ward length-of-stay (LOS) was 17 days (IQR 10-34). OXA-48 CPE was confirmed in all cases and from 26 environmental samples. Social networks identified clusters by time, gender and species/sequence type/plasmid. Network metrics indicated potential superspreading involving a subset of patients with behavioural issues. Conclusion: Social networks elucidated high resolution transmission patterns involving two related OXA-48 plasmids, multiple species/genotypes and potential super-spreading. Interventions prevented intra-hospital spread. An older patient cohort, extended hospital LOS and frequent intra-ward bed transfers, coupled with suboptimal ward infrastructure, likely prolonged this outbreak. We recommend social network analysis contemporaneously with genomics (on case and environmental samples) for complex nosocomial outbreaks and bespoke care plans for patients with behavioural issues on outbreak wards.
RESUMEN
Objectives: Molecular epidemiological description of an OXA-48 CPE outbreak affecting a tertiary-care hospital ward in Ireland over an extended period (2018-2019). Methods: Microbiological testing and whole-genome sequencing (WGS) were performed on all 56 positive OXA-48 outbreak case isolates. Results: In total, 7 different species were identified: Enterobacter hormaechei (n = 35, 62.5%), Escherichia coli (n = 12, 21.4%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 5, 8.9%), Klebsiella oxytoca (n = 1, 1.8%), Klebsiella michiganensis (n = 1, 1.8%), Citrobacter freundii (n = 1, 1.8%), and Serratia marcesens (n = 1, 1.8%). E. hormaechei ST78 was the most common genotype (n = 14, 25%). Two major pOXA-48 plasmid types were identified throughout the outbreak, 'types' 1 and 2, and 5 major E. hormaechei clonal groupings were identified: ST78, ST108, ST1126, ST135, and ST66. Within each of the ST108, ST1126, ST135 and ST66 groups, the pOXA-48 harbored within each isolate were the same. Within ST78, 9 isolates contained the pOXA48 'type 2' plasmid and 5 contained the 'type 1' plasmid. Environmental specimens were taken from different outbreak ward locations: handwash basins, sink and shower drains, and taps. Of 394 environmental specimens, OXA-48 CPE was isolated from 26 (6.6%). Conclusions: This prolonged outbreak of OXA-48 CPE was confined to one ward, but it exemplifies the complexity and difficulty in the control of these organisms. With multiple species and genotypes involved, they may be better described as 'plasmid outbreaks.' WGS provided insights into this diversity and potential transmission among cases, though its usefulness would be enhanced by analysis as close as possible to real time so that interventions can be implemented as soon as data are available.
RESUMEN
Introduction: Saliva represents a less invasive alternative to nasopharyngeal swab (NPS) for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) detection. SalivaDirect is a nucleic acid extraction-free method for detecting SARS-CoV2 in saliva specimens. Studies evaluating the concordance of gold standard NPS and newly developed SalivaDirect protocols are limited. The aim of our study was to assess SalivaDirect as an alternative method for COVID-19 testing. Methods: Matching NPS and saliva samples were analysed from a cohort of symptomatic (n=127) and asymptomatic (n=181) participants recruited from hospital and university settings, respectively. RNA was extracted from NPS while saliva samples were subjected to the SalivaDirect protocol before RT-qPCR analysis. The presence of SARS-Cov-2 was assessed using RdRp and N1 gene targets in NPS and saliva, respectively. Results: Overall we observed 94.3% sensitivity (95% CI 87.2-97.5%), and 95.9% specificity (95% CI 92.4-97.8%) in saliva when compared to matching NPS samples. Analysis of concordance demonstrated 95.5% accuracy overall for the saliva test relative to NPS, and a very high level of agreement (κ coefficient = 0.889, 95% CI 0.833-0.946) between the two sets of specimens. Fourteen of 308 samples were discordant, all from symptomatic patients. Ct values were >30 in 13/14 and >35 in 6/14 samples. No significant difference was found in the Ct values of matching NPS and saliva sample ( p=0.860). A highly significant correlation (r = 0.475, p<0.0001) was also found between the Ct values of the concordant positive saliva and NPS specimens. Conclusions: Use of saliva processed according to the SalivaDirect protocol represents a valid method to detect SARS-CoV-2. Accurate and less invasive saliva screening is an attractive alternative to current testing methods based on NPS and would afford greater capacity to test asymptomatic populations especially in the context of frequent testing.