rate of detection of multiple organisms and clostridium

2
Lehigh Valley Health Network LVHN Scholarly Works Department of Pediatrics Rate of Detection of Multiple Organisms and Clostridium difficile with Stool Multiplex PCR Detection Test in Pediatrics (Poster). Saisho Mangla DO Lehigh Valley Health Network, [email protected] Tibisay Villalobos MD Lehigh Valley Health Network, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: hps://scholarlyworks.lvhn.org/pediatrics Part of the Pediatrics Commons is Poster is brought to you for free and open access by LVHN Scholarly Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in LVHN Scholarly Works by an authorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Published In/Presented At Mangla, S. Villalobos, T. (2017, October 4). Rate of Detection of Multiple Organisms and Clostridium difficile with Stool Multiplex PCR Detection Test in Pediatrics. Poster Presented at: IDweek 2017, San Diego, California.

Upload: others

Post on 16-May-2022

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Rate of Detection of Multiple Organisms and Clostridium

Lehigh Valley Health NetworkLVHN Scholarly Works

Department of Pediatrics

Rate of Detection of Multiple Organisms andClostridium difficile with Stool Multiplex PCRDetection Test in Pediatrics (Poster).Saisho Mangla DOLehigh Valley Health Network, [email protected]

Tibisay Villalobos MDLehigh Valley Health Network, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlyworks.lvhn.org/pediatrics

Part of the Pediatrics Commons

This Poster is brought to you for free and open access by LVHN Scholarly Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in LVHN Scholarly Works by anauthorized administrator. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Published In/Presented AtMangla, S. Villalobos, T. (2017, October 4). Rate of Detection of Multiple Organisms and Clostridium difficile with Stool Multiplex PCRDetection Test in Pediatrics. Poster Presented at: IDweek 2017, San Diego, California.

Page 2: Rate of Detection of Multiple Organisms and Clostridium

References:1. Buss SN, Leber A, Chapin K, et al. Multicenter evaluation of the BioFire FilmArray

gastrointestinal panel for etiologic diagnosis of infectious gastroenteritis. J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Mar; 53(3):915-25.

2. Spina A, Kerr KG, Cormican M, et al. Spectrum of enteropathogens detected by the FilmArray GI Panel in a multicentre study of community-acquired gastroenteritis. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015 Aug; 21(8):719-28.

© 2017 Lehigh Valley Health Network

Rate of Detection of Multiple Organisms and Clostridium difficile with Stool Multiplex CPR Detection Test in Pediatrics

New multiplex molecular assays have been developed to determine the etiology of infectious gastroenteritis. Unfortunately, these assays can detect multiple organisms simultaneously along with Clostridium difficile (C.diff), making it difficult to differentiate true pathogen versus colonization.

In January 2015, our institution switched from traditional testing methods to a multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) detection test (FilmArrayTM Gastrointestinal Panel. BioFireDX, Salt Lake City, Utah). The objective of our study was to determine the number of FilmArrayTM panels that detected C.diff and/or multiple organisms.

• Although the FilmArrayTM Gastrointestinal Panel is a useful single modality for determining the etiology of infectious gastroenteritis, more than one organism is frequently detected.

• C.diff has become the most common organism isolated among children at our institution.

• Caution should be used when interpreting the isolation of C.diff in younger children and when isolated with other organisms since it is likely to be a colonizer.

Distribution of Organisms by Multiplex PCR in 2016

Figure 2: A total of 294 organisms were detected collectively in all of the positive FilmArrayTM panels. C. difficile was the most commonly isolated organism.

27

2014

105

8

37

3 2

85

4 4

41

6

16

36

2 3 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Num

ber o

f Tim

es D

etec

ted

70

3332

2825

23 2220

9 96 6 5

2 1 1 1 10

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80N

umbe

r of T

imes

Det

ecte

d

Organism

STUDY OBJECTIVES:• Determine the distribution of organisms detected by the FilmArrayTM

panel.

METHODS:• Retrospective data review of FilmArrayTM panels in pediatric patients

18 years and younger from January 2015 to December 2016.

• Stool samples were received from both inpatient and outpatient setting.

EXCLUSION CRITERIA:• Any patient older than 18 years.

Figure 1: A total of 416 organisms were detected collectively in all of the positive FilmArrayTM panels. C. difficile was the most commonly isolated organism.

Distribution of Organisms by Multiplex PCR in 2015

Age Distribution of All C.diff Isolated in 2016

9

25

10

87

5

2

11

3 34

5

2 2

5

1

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Num

ber o

f Film

Arra

y Pa

nels

Age

Figure 3: The age distribution of patient with C.difficile isolated on FilmArrayTM

panels in 2016.

Age Distribution of All C.diff Isolated in 2015

Figure 4: The age distribution of patient with C.difficile isolated on FilmArrayTM

panels in 2015.

4

18

9

5

3

1

4 4

2 2

4

2

1

2

3

2 2 2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Num

ber o

f Film

Arra

y Pa

nels

Age

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Num

ber o

f Film

Arra

y Pa

nels

AgeC.Diff Isolated Alone C.Diff Isolated with another organism C.Diff isolated with two organisms C.diff isolated with 3 organisms

Age Distribution of Panels with C.diff Isolated in 2016

Figure 7: The age distribution of patient with C.difficile isolated on FilmArrayTM panels.

Organisms Isolated with C.diff in 2016

Figure 5: The distribution of organisms that were detected in combination with C.difficile.

2

6

0

2

7

0 0

14

1

0

6

3 3

4

0 0

2

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Organisms Isolated with C.diff in 2015

Figure 6: The distribution of organisms that were detected in combination with C.difficile.

3. Stockmann C, Rogatcheva M, Harrel B, et al. How well does physician selection of microbiologic tests identify Clostridium difficile and other pathogens in paediatric diarrhoea? Insights using multiplex PCR-based detection. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015 Feb; 21(2):179.e9-15.

4. Zhang H, Morrison S, Tang YW. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction tests for detection of pathogens associated with gastroenteritis. Clin Lab Med. 2015 Jun; 35(2):461-86.

Lehigh Valley Health Network, Allentown, Pennsylvania

Saisho Mangla, DO and Tibisay Villalobos, MD, FAAP

6

1 1

8

1

14

11

1 1 1 1 1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Sapo

virus

(I, II

, IV an

d V)

Noro

virus

GI/G

II

Astro

virus

Aden

oviru

s F 40

/41

Rotav

irus A

Enter

oagg

rega

tive E

. coli

(EAE

C)

Enter

opath

ogen

ic E.

coli (

EPEC

)

Shiga

-like t

oxin-

prod

ucing

E. c

oli (S

TEC)

Salm

onell

a

Yersi

nia en

teroc

olitic

a

Camp

yloba

cter (

jejun

i, coli

and u

psali

ensis

Cryp

tospo

ridium

CONCLUSIONS

RESULTSBACKGROUND

Table 1. Twenty Two Potential Organisms that can be Detected by the FilmArrayTM Gastrointestinal Panel

Bacteria Diarrheagenic E. coli/Shigella Parasites Viruses

Campylobacter (jejuni, coli and upsaliensis) Enteroaggregative E. coli (EAEC) Cryptosporidium Adenovirus F 40/41

Clostridium difficile (toxin A/B) Enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) Cyclospora cayetanensis Astrovirus

Plesiomonas shigelloides Enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) lt/st Entamoeba histolytica Norovirus GI/GII

Salmonella Shiga-like toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) stx1/stx2 Giardia lamblia Rotavirus A

Yersinia enterocolitica E. coli O157 Sapovirus (I, II, IV and V) Vibrio (parahaemolyticus, vulnificus and cholerae) Shigella/Enteroinvasive E. coli (EIEC)

Vibrio cholerae