Rapid genotypic methods to speed up the diagnosis of polymicrobial bloodstream infections

Brigitte Lamy*1, Caroline Bonnefoy1, Mathilde Vannini1, Nicolas Degand1, Alice Gaudart1, Romain Lotte1, Caroline Touati1, Raymond Ruimy1

Author address: 

1 CHU Nice, Nice, France


Background: Polymicrobial bloodstream infection is a difficult diagnostic and therapeutic situation. Inappropriate antimicrobial empiric treatment is twice as high than in monomicrobial bacteremia and diagnostic test methods (identification, antimicrobial susceptibility testing) are ineffective without a subculture step due to the bacterial mix. This results in a long time to results and poorer outcome.

The aim of the study was to evaluate the contribution of a rapid genotypic method (Unyvero®, Curetis) in managing polymicrobial blood cultures.

Materials/methods: 62 polymicrobial blood cultures (one per patient) were prospectively assessed at the academic hospital of Nice (France) with the methods in use in the laboratory (MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry, disk diffusion method) and with Unyvero BCU® application (time to results <5h). Additionally, 30 bottles were spiked with a mix of 2 bacteria that comprised at least one multi-drug resistant microorganism (ESBL, OXA-48, KPC, mecA), and bottles were assessed with the same protocol. Agreement between the 2 methods for identification and antimicrobial resistance detection was determined and time to results were compared.

Results: In the prospective study, 52/62 blood cultures were detected polymicrobial with the BCU® cartridge. All the bacteria of the mix and at least one micro-organism were correctly identified at least at the genus level for 41 (66%) and 58 (94%) blood cultures, respectively. A total of 82% and 53% of bacteria (n=144) were correctly identified at the genus level and species level, respectively, 6% were erroneously identified. Taxa absent from the BCU® panel were the most frequent cause of bacterial detection default (anaerobes, Morganella). Mechanisms of resistance to betalactams were correctly detected for 94% of the bacteria, but neither 1/5 ESBL nor overproduction of cephalosporinase was detected (7 cases). In the spiking study, 73% (17/22) ESBL, and all OXA-48 (n=14), KPC (n=3) and mecA (n=5) were correctly detected. BCU® results (identification, resistance detection) were correct for 57% of the polymicrobial blood cultures. Time to results was reduced by 48h (median) and 119h (percentile 95).

Conclusions: these promising results show that advanced diagnosis can aid to timely document polymicrobial bacteremia and to adjust empiric therapy, but identification and resistance panels should prior be extended.



Image icon image.png671.27 KB

abstract No: 


Full conference title: 

European Congress of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 2019
    • ECCMID 29th (2019)