Evaluation of the FilmArray Blood Culture Identification Panel compared to direct MALDI‐TOF MS identification for rapid identification of pathogens. Issue 9 (September 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Payne, Michael; Champagne, Sylvie; Lowe, Christopher; Leung, Victor; Hinch, Michelle; Romney, Marc G.
• Is Part Of: Journal of medical microbiology. Volume 67:Issue 9(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-09
• Subjects: Antimicrobial stewardship -- BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture Identification Panel -- direct MALDI‐TOF; Medical microbiology -- Periodicals; 616.9041
• DOI: 10.1099/jmm.0.000802
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0022-2615

Abstract

Abstract : N/A: To improve time to identification of pathogens and detection of resistance genes, we evaluated the BioFire FilmArray Blood Culture Identification Panel (BCID) as compared to: (1) direct MALDI‐TOF MS (DM) and (2) standardized culture‐based identification (ID) with antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST). BCID gave an accurate identification in 102/112 (91 %) of cases (102/103 for on‐panel organisms). DM gave an accurate identification in 91/112 (81 %) of cases, with 13/91 (14 %) requiring repeat testing from the residual pellet. The mean time to an identification result was 2.4 and 2.9 h for BCID and DM, respectively. Standardized ID and AST results were available at a mean time of 26.5 and 33 h, respectively. There were 44 BCID/DM results that had an antimicrobial treatment change made based on rapid identification and resistant gene detection of pathogens. Both BCID and DM are accurate and rapid methods for the identification of new positive blood culture pathogens.