Cargando…
The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection
BACKGROUND: Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost of treatment in critically ill patients. A differential time to positivity (DTP) of 120 min or more between blood cultures obtained through the catheter vs. peripheral vein is an in...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290260/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35843933 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07605-x |
_version_ | 1784748859470118912 |
---|---|
author | Deawtrakulchai, Phitphiboon Cheawchanwattana, Surampa Sribenjalux, Wantin Meesing, Atibordee |
author_facet | Deawtrakulchai, Phitphiboon Cheawchanwattana, Surampa Sribenjalux, Wantin Meesing, Atibordee |
author_sort | Deawtrakulchai, Phitphiboon |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost of treatment in critically ill patients. A differential time to positivity (DTP) of 120 min or more between blood cultures obtained through the catheter vs. peripheral vein is an indicator of CRBSI with high sensitivity and specificity. However, it is no clear whether pooled sampling would be as efficient as individual sampling in order to reduce costs, contamination, or anemia. METHODS: This was a prospective diagnostic study conducted at the medical ICU and semi-ICU of Khon Kaen University’s Srinagarind Hospital in Thailand from May 2020 to November 2021. Fifty patients with triple-lumen central venous catheters (CVCs) who were clinically suspected of CRBSI were enrolled. 15 mL of blood was drawn through each catheter lumen, 10 mL of which was inoculated into three blood culture bottles, and the remaining 5 mL was pooled into a single bottle. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and time to positivity of the pooled blood cultures were calculated using individual blood cultures as a reference. RESULTS: Of the 50 patients enrolled, 14 (28%) were diagnosed with CRBSI, 57.9% of whom were infected with gram-negative bacteria as the causative pathogen (57.9%). Extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most common organism. Sensitivity and specificity of the pooled blood sampling method were 69.23% (95% CI [0.44–0.94]) and 97.3% (95% CI [0.92–1.02]), respectively. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.83 (95% CI [0.68–0.99]). A paired T-Test to compare time to positivity of the pooled blood bottle and the first positive culture from the individual bottles indicated statistical significance (14.9 and 12.4 h, respectively). The mean difference was 2.5 [0.9–4.1] h, with a 95% CI and a p-value of 0.006. CONCLUSION: Pooled blood sampling results in a lower sensitivity and longer time to positivity for CRBSI diagnosis in patients with triple-lumen CVCs than individual lumen sampling. Trial registration Retrospectively registered at Thai Clinical Trials Registry. The study was reviewed and approved on 08/03/2022. TCTR identification number is TCTR20220308002 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07605-x. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9290260 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92902602022-07-19 The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection Deawtrakulchai, Phitphiboon Cheawchanwattana, Surampa Sribenjalux, Wantin Meesing, Atibordee BMC Infect Dis Research BACKGROUND: Catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI) is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and cost of treatment in critically ill patients. A differential time to positivity (DTP) of 120 min or more between blood cultures obtained through the catheter vs. peripheral vein is an indicator of CRBSI with high sensitivity and specificity. However, it is no clear whether pooled sampling would be as efficient as individual sampling in order to reduce costs, contamination, or anemia. METHODS: This was a prospective diagnostic study conducted at the medical ICU and semi-ICU of Khon Kaen University’s Srinagarind Hospital in Thailand from May 2020 to November 2021. Fifty patients with triple-lumen central venous catheters (CVCs) who were clinically suspected of CRBSI were enrolled. 15 mL of blood was drawn through each catheter lumen, 10 mL of which was inoculated into three blood culture bottles, and the remaining 5 mL was pooled into a single bottle. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and time to positivity of the pooled blood cultures were calculated using individual blood cultures as a reference. RESULTS: Of the 50 patients enrolled, 14 (28%) were diagnosed with CRBSI, 57.9% of whom were infected with gram-negative bacteria as the causative pathogen (57.9%). Extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Klebsiella pneumoniae was the most common organism. Sensitivity and specificity of the pooled blood sampling method were 69.23% (95% CI [0.44–0.94]) and 97.3% (95% CI [0.92–1.02]), respectively. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.83 (95% CI [0.68–0.99]). A paired T-Test to compare time to positivity of the pooled blood bottle and the first positive culture from the individual bottles indicated statistical significance (14.9 and 12.4 h, respectively). The mean difference was 2.5 [0.9–4.1] h, with a 95% CI and a p-value of 0.006. CONCLUSION: Pooled blood sampling results in a lower sensitivity and longer time to positivity for CRBSI diagnosis in patients with triple-lumen CVCs than individual lumen sampling. Trial registration Retrospectively registered at Thai Clinical Trials Registry. The study was reviewed and approved on 08/03/2022. TCTR identification number is TCTR20220308002 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07605-x. BioMed Central 2022-07-17 /pmc/articles/PMC9290260/ /pubmed/35843933 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07605-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Deawtrakulchai, Phitphiboon Cheawchanwattana, Surampa Sribenjalux, Wantin Meesing, Atibordee The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection |
title | The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection |
title_full | The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection |
title_fullStr | The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection |
title_full_unstemmed | The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection |
title_short | The comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection |
title_sort | comparative accuracy of pooled vs. individual blood culture sampling methods for diagnosis of catheter-related bloodstream infection |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9290260/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35843933 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-022-07605-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT deawtrakulchaiphitphiboon thecomparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection AT cheawchanwattanasurampa thecomparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection AT sribenjaluxwantin thecomparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection AT meesingatibordee thecomparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection AT deawtrakulchaiphitphiboon comparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection AT cheawchanwattanasurampa comparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection AT sribenjaluxwantin comparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection AT meesingatibordee comparativeaccuracyofpooledvsindividualbloodculturesamplingmethodsfordiagnosisofcatheterrelatedbloodstreaminfection |