DOCSLIB.ORG

Infection Data: Form Updates

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Infection Data: Form Updates Infection Data: Form Updates Marcie Riches, MD, MS Associate Professor University of North Carolina Scientific Director, Infection and Immune Reconstitution WC Overview • Why is infection data important? • Why is it so complicated? • What to report • Infections account for 7 – 17% of the primary cause of death as reported to the CIBMTR • The incidence of infection in transplant patients is much higher, with nearly 70% or more patients having at least one infection in the post-transplant period Can infections be prevented? • Guidelines published in 2009 for infection prevention1 • Prophylaxis and new antimicrobials have decreased early serious infections2 – CMV disease decreased by 48% – GN bacteremia decreased by 39% – Invasive mold infections decreased by 51% – Invasive Candida infections decreased by 88% • Later infections continue to remain a problem 1Tomblyn et al, BBMT and BMT, 2009 2Gooley et al, NEJM 2010 Prior Infection Prophylaxis Data Collected y/n for all drugs received after the start of the conditioning regimen * Results in data documenting patients receiving multiple drugs of the same class with no information on sequence/overlap* Revised Infection Prophylaxis Data • Collect medication prophylaxis data by antimicrobial type (i.e. bacterial, viral, fungal) • Key change: – Collect only the first drug started closest to the start of the preparative regimen – Only in the antibacterial group can more than one drug be selected • Both drugs must start at the same time! 2100 v 4.0 q 407 – 418 Antibacterial Medications 2100 v 4.0 q 419 – 421 Antiviral Medications • The option of “None” means the patient did not receive any antiviral drug from the start of the preparative regimen through Day +45 • Clinically, this would be highly unusual 2100 v 4.0 q 422 – 424 Antifungal Medications 2100 v 4.0 q 425 – 427 Anti-pneumocystis Medications Why the change • Understanding the anti-microbial medications at the time of transplant is useful to understand subsequent infections • Pros: – Data is discrete (single drug) – Can use to study prophylaxis patterns • Cons: – Doesn’t provide information on changes in prophylaxis or therapy within an individual patient Infection Reporting • Changes: – Organism list updated • Focused on viral and fungal infections • Rare/serious bacterial infections – Site list refined – Addition of questions for SIRS and Septic Shock • Manual updated – What not to report – Examples Infection reporting Bacterial Organisms: 2100 v4.0 • Acinetobacter • Legionella pneumophilia • Nocardia • Bordatella pertussis • Legionella non-pneumophilia • Pasteurella multocida • Burkholderia cepacia • Leptospira • Proteus • Campylobacter • Leptotrichia buccalis • Pseudomonas aeruginosa • Capnocytophaga • Leuconostoc • Pseudomonas non-aeruginosa • Chlamydia pneumoniae • Listeria • Rhodococcus • Citrobacter • Micrococcus • Rickettsia • Clostridium (not difficile) • Mycobacterium abscessus • Salmonella • Clostridium difficile • Mycobacterium avium • Serratia marcescens • Corynebacterium jeikeium intracellulare (MAI) • Shigella • Enterobacter • Mycobacterium cheloneae • Staphylococcus aureus • Enterococcus (VRE) • Mycobacterium fortuitum (Methicillin Resistant) • Enterococcus (not VRE) • Mycobacterium haemophilum • Staphylococcus aureus • Escherichia/E. coli • Mycobacterium kansasii (Methicillin Sensitive) • Fusobacterium • Mycobacterium marinum • Stenotrophomonas maltophilia • Haemophilus influenzae • Mycobacterium mucogenicum • Stomatococcus • Haemophilus non-influenzae • Mycobacterium Tb • Streptococcus, alpha-hemolytic • Klebsiella • Mycoplasma • Streptococcus, Group B • Lactobacillus • Neisseria gonorrhea • Streptococcus pneumoniae • Neisseria meningitidis • Treponema (syphillis) • Vibrio (all spp) Removed several bacterial organisms we are unlikely to study Viral Organisms: 2100 v4.0 • Adenovirus • Hepatitis A • JC Virus • BK Virus • Hepatitis B • Measles (rubeola) • Coronavirus • Hepatitis C • Mumps • CMV • Hepatitis E • Norovirus • Chikaungunya • Herpes Simplex • PML • Dengue • HHV-6 • Parainfluenza • Enterovirus (ECHO, • HIV 1/HIV 2 • RSV Coxsackie) • Human metapneumovirus • Rhinovirus • Enterovirus D68 (EV-D68) • HPV • Rotavirus • Enterovirus (polio) • HTLV 1/2 • Rubella • Enterovirus NOS • Influenza NOS • Varicella • EBV • Influenza A • WNV • Influenza B Several new viruses added Split out certain viruses into 2 categories based upon infections Fungi and Parasites: 2100 v4.0 Fungi Parasites • Aspergillus NOS • Cryptococcus gattii • Chaga's • Aspergillus flavus • Cryptococcus neoformans • Cryptosporidium • Aspergillus fumigatus • Fusarium spp • Giardia • Aspergillus niger • Histoplasmosis • Helminths • Aspergillus terreus • Mucormycosis • Strongyloides • Aspergillus ustus • Pneumocystis • Toxoplasma • Blastomycosis • Rhizopus • Candida albicans • Scedosporium • Candida non-albicans • Zygomycetes, NOS • Coccidiomycosis • Suspected Fungal Infection Combined all Candida spp into 2 groups Expanded out Aspergillus Added new organisms of importance Sites of Infection (prior) **Disseminated infections must have the organism identified at 3 or more non-contiguous sites Site: Changes 2100 v4 • Blood • Liver/Spleen • Bone • Lung • CNS • Skin/Cellulitis • Eyes • Skin, necrotizing • Genital fasciitis • GI tract, upper • Sinuses/Upper • GI tract, lower respiratory tract • Joints • Urinary tract, upper • Urinary tract, lower SIRS/Septic Shock • SIRS: a clinical syndrome of dysregulated inflammation with 2 or more abnormalities in temp, HR, RR, or WBC – Does not have to have an organism identified – May also be labeled “sepsis” • Septic Shock: Sepsis (life-threatening organ dysfunction) associated with circulatory collapse requiring vasopressors and a lactate of >2 mmol/L associated with an infection – Does not have to have an organism identified – Higher risk of death compared to SIRS/Sepsis alone What not to report at all! • Culture negative neutropenic fever – Note: if SIRS/sepsis or Septic Shock occurred, this will be reported separately • Suspected but unconfirmed viral or bacterial infections – Includes URI presumed viral but no virus identified • Candida spp found only in oropharynx or stool • Toe nail fungus (onychomycoses) What not to report because it’s the same infection: Bacteria Virus Fungal ≤7 days ≤14 days ≤14 days • All bacteria (except • Adenovirus • Yeasts Clostridium Difficile) • Enterovirus Candida spp • Herpes/Varicella zoster Cryptococcus ≤30 days • Influenza virus • Clostridium Difficile • Parainfluenza • Rhinovirus ≤90 days ≤ 365 days • Respiratory syncytial virus • Molds • Helicobacter pylori ≤60 days Aspergillus • Cytomegalovirus Fusarium • Herpes simplex virus Mucor • Polyomavirus • Epstein-Barr virus Additional changes in process • Revisions to 2046/2146 Fungal Infection forms (planned ~April 2017) • Additional forms – Respiratory virus form 2149 (~April 2017) – CMV/HHV-6/EBV/Adenovirus forms (~July 2017) • Planned: – Revisions to 2047/2147 Hepatitis viral forms – Revisions to 2048/2148 HIV forms – Addition of PJP form 2046/2146 Changes • Need data regarding diagnostic testing – Allows for researchers to categorize infections as possible/probable/proven • Need data regarding treatment – Set specific times for assessment of drugs – Only request start date • Form 2146 required for any fungal infection (including suspected) reported on 2100/2200 Form 2046/2146: Diagnostic tests • Mark if the test was considered “positive” to support the diagnosis of fungal infection • Sections for: – Radiology (CXR, CT scan, MRI) – Pathology (biopsy or cytology) – Cultures – Stains (KOH/Calcofluor/Giemsa) – Assays (Galactomannan, Fungitell) • Under the test type, specific sites/sample sources requested – Set up as skip patterns with the ability to copy and paste to report multiple sites within a specific test Form 2046/2146: Diagnostic tests (ex) Form 2146: Lab data • Request data on specific labs at the date of diagnosis of the infection (+/- 7 days) • Blood counts – WBC – % neutrophils – % lymphocytes – % monocytes – Platelets Form 2046/2146: Treatment • Request data on all antifungal medications (list provided) from 7 days prior to the diagnosis of the infection until the end of the reporting period – Request start date • 2046: Note this may be unknown • 2146: Generally the HCT center is involved so should be able to find/estimate – For each drug received, asks if the patient is still receiving the drug 30 days (+/-3) from date of diagnosis Form 2046/2146: Treatment Only for 2146 Form 2046/2146: Response to Therapy • Form 2046 • Form 2146 Form 2149: Respiratory Virus Form • Triggered in the following circumstances: – Organism of either RSV, PIV, Influenza NOS/A/B or metapneumovirus – Organism Rhinovirus or Coronovirus only if the site of infection includes “LUNG” • Rationale: – Respiratory viruses can be fatal in the immunocompromised patient – Data to understand in our patient population is needed • Goal: – Collect information on diagnosis, risk factors, and treatment/response to therapy Form 2149: Diagnosis • Collect information on tests with a positive result supporting the diagnosis • Tests performed 7 days before and up to 14 days after the reported date of infection – Allows us to have global picture of certainty of diagnosis Form 2149: Diagnosis Form 2149: Clinical Factors • Lab parameters (+/- 7 days of infection diagnosis) – WBC, % neutrophils, % lymphocytes, % monocytes, platelets – IgG level Form 2149: Therapy and Response • Specific antiviral drugs from 7 days prior to date of infection until 14 days after
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Artus Mycobac. Diff. LC PCR Kit Handbook 10/2015 2
    October 2015 artus® Mycobac. diff. LC PCR Kit Handbook 24 96 Version 1 Quantitative in vitro diagnostics For use with the LightCycler® 1.1/1.2/1.5 and LightCycler 2.0 instruments 4556063 (24 reactions) 4556065 (96 reactions) QIAGEN GmbH QIAGEN Strasse 1 40724 Hilden GERMANY R4 1046963EN Sample to Insight__ Contents Summary and Explanation ...................................................................................................4 Principle of the Procedure ....................................................................................................4 Materials Provided .............................................................................................................6 Kit contents ..............................................................................................................6 Materials Required but Not Provided ....................................................................................7 Warnings and Precautions ..................................................................................................8 Warnings ................................................................................................................8 Reagent Storage and Handling ............................................................................................8 Procedure ..........................................................................................................................9 Important points before starting ..................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • ID 2 | Issue No: 4.1 | Issue Date: 29.10.14 | Page: 1 of 24 © Crown Copyright 2014 Identification of Corynebacterium Species
    UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations Identification of Corynebacterium species Issued by the Standards Unit, Microbiology Services, PHE Bacteriology – Identification | ID 2 | Issue no: 4.1 | Issue date: 29.10.14 | Page: 1 of 24 © Crown copyright 2014 Identification of Corynebacterium species Acknowledgments UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations (SMIs) are developed under the auspices of Public Health England (PHE) working in partnership with the National Health Service (NHS), Public Health Wales and with the professional organisations whose logos are displayed below and listed on the website https://www.gov.uk/uk- standards-for-microbiology-investigations-smi-quality-and-consistency-in-clinical- laboratories. SMIs are developed, reviewed and revised by various working groups which are overseen by a steering committee (see https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/standards-for-microbiology-investigations- steering-committee). The contributions of many individuals in clinical, specialist and reference laboratories who have provided information and comments during the development of this document are acknowledged. We are grateful to the Medical Editors for editing the medical content. For further information please contact us at: Standards Unit Microbiology Services Public Health England 61 Colindale Avenue London NW9 5EQ E-mail: [email protected] Website: https://www.gov.uk/uk-standards-for-microbiology-investigations-smi-quality- and-consistency-in-clinical-laboratories UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations are produced in association with: Logos correct at time of publishing. Bacteriology – Identification | ID 2 | Issue no: 4.1 | Issue date: 29.10.14 | Page: 2 of 24 UK Standards for Microbiology Investigations | Issued by the Standards Unit, Public Health England Identification of Corynebacterium species Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Enhanced Characterization of the Human Skin Microbiome
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.01.21.914820; this version posted January 23, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 An enhanced characterization of the human skin microbiome: a new biodiversity of 2 microbial interactions 3 4 Akintunde Emiola1, Wei Zhou1, Julia Oh1* 5 6 1The Jackson Laboratory for Genomic Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut, USA 7 *Corresponding author. [email protected] 8 9 10 ABSTRACT 11 12 The healthy human skin microbiome is shaped by skin site physiology, individual-specific factors, 13 and is largely stable over time despite significant environmental perturbation. Studies identifying 14 these characteristics used shotgun metagenomic sequencing for high resolution reconstruction 15 of the bacteria, fungi, and viruses in the community. However, these conclusions were drawn from 16 a relatively small proportion of the total sequence reads analyzable by mapping to known 17 reference genomes. ‘Reference-free’ approaches, based on de novo assembly of reads into 18 genome fragments, are also limited in their ability to capture low abundance species, small 19 genomes, and to discriminate between more similar genomes. To account for the large fraction 20 of non-human unmapped reads on the skin—referred to as microbial ‘dark matter’—we used a 21 hybrid de novo and reference-based approach to annotate a metagenomic dataset of 698 healthy 22 human skin samples. This approach reduced the overall proportion of uncharacterized reads from 23 42% to 17%. With our refined characterization, we revisited assumptions about the skin 24 microbiome, and demonstrated higher biodiversity and lower stability, particularly in dry and moist 25 skin sites.
    [Show full text]
  • Corynebacterium Species Rarely Cause Orthopedic Infections
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2018 Corynebacterium species rarely cause orthopedic infections Kalt, Fabian ; Schulthess, Bettina ; Sidler, Fabian ; Herren, Sebastian ; Fucentese, Sandro F ; Zingg, Patrick O ; Berli, Martin ; Zinkernagel, Annelies S ; Zbinden, Reinhard ; Achermann, Yvonne Abstract: Corynebacterium spp. are rarely considered as pathogens but data in orthopedic infections are sparse. Therefore, we asked how often Corynebacterium spp. caused an infection in a defined cohort of orthopedic patients with a positive culture. In addition, we aimed to determine the species variety and susceptibility of isolated strains in regards to potential treatment strategies. Between 2006 and 2015, we retrospectively assessed all Corynebacterium sp. bone and joint cultures from an orthopedic ward. The isolates were considered as relevant indicating an infection if the same Corynebacterium sp. was present in at least two samples. We found 97 orthopedic cases with isolation of Corynebacterium spp. (128 positive samples), mainly Corynebacterium tuberculostearicum (n=26), Corynebacterium amycolatum (n=17), Corynebacterium striatum (n=13), and Corynebacterium afermentans (n=11). Compared to a cohort of positive blood cultures, we found significantly more C. striatum and C. tuberculostearicum but no C. jeikeium cases. Only 16 cases out 66 cases (24.2%) with an available diagnostic set of at least 2 samples had an infection. Antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) of different antibiotics showed various susceptibility results except for vancomycin and linezolid with a 100% susceptibility rate. Rates of susceptibility of corynebacteria isolated from orthopedic samples and of isolates from blood cultures were comparable. In conclusion, our study results confirmed that Corynebacterium sp.
    [Show full text]
  • MICROBIOLOGY LEGEND CYCLE 36 ORGANISM 5 Corynebacterium
    P.O. Box 131375, Bryanston, 2074 Ground Floor, Block 5 Bryanston Gate, 170 Curzon Road Bryanston, Johannesburg, South Africa 804 Flatrock, Buiten Street, Cape Town, 8001 www.thistle.co.za Tel: +27 (011) 463 3260 Fax: +27 (011) 463 3036 Fax to Email: + 27 (0) 86-557-2232 e-mail : [email protected] Please read this section first The HPCSA and the Med Tech Society have confirmed that this clinical case study, plus your routine review of your EQA reports from Thistle QA, should be documented as a “Journal Club” activity. This means that you must record those attending for CEU purposes. Thistle will not issue a certificate to cover these activities, nor send out “correct” answers to the CEU questions at the end of this case study. The Thistle QA CEU No is: MT-2014/004. Each attendee should claim THREE CEU points for completing this Quality Control Journal Club exercise, and retain a copy of the relevant Thistle QA Participation Certificate as proof of registration on a Thistle QA EQA. MICROBIOLOGY LEGEND CYCLE 36 ORGANISM 5 Corynebacterium Corynebacteria (from the Greek words koryne, meaning club, and bacterion, meaning little rod) are gram-positive, catalase-positive, aerobic or facultatively anaerobic, generally nonmotile rods. The genus contains the species Corynebacterium diphtheriae and the nondiphtherial Corynebacteria, collectively referred to as diphtheroids. Nondiphtherial Corynebacteria, originally thought to be mainly contaminants, have increasingly over the past 2 decades been recognized as pathogenic, especially in the elderly and immunocompromised hosts. They are ubiquitous in nature and commonly colonize human skin and mucous membranes.
    [Show full text]
  • From Contamination to Infective Endocarditis—A Population-Based Retrospective Study of Corynebacterium Isolated from Blood Cultures
    European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases (2020) 39:113–119 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-019-03698-6 ORIGINAL ARTICLE From contamination to infective endocarditis—a population-based retrospective study of Corynebacterium isolated from blood cultures Magnus Rasmussen1,2,3 & Anna Wramneby Mohlin1 & Bo Nilson4,5 Received: 27 June 2019 /Accepted: 30 August 2019 /Published online: 4 September 2019 # The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Corynebacterium is a genus that can contaminate blood cultures and also cause severe infections like infective endocarditis (IE). Our purpose was to investigate microbiological and clinical features associated with contamination and true infection. A retrospective population-based study of Corynebacterium bacteremia 2012–2017 in southern Sweden was performed. Corynebacterium isolates were species determined using a matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight mass spec- trometry (MALDI-TOF MS). Patient were, from the medical records, classified as having true infection or contamination caused by Corynebacterium through a scheme considering both bacteriological and clinical features and the groups were compared. Three hundred thirty-nine episodes of bacteremia with Corynebacterium were identified in 335 patients of which 30 (8.8%) episodes were classified as true infection. Thirteen patients with true bacteremia had only one positive blood culture. Infections were typically community acquired and affected mostly older males with comorbidities. The focus of infection was most often unknown, and in-hospital mortality was around 10% in both the groups with true infection and contamination. Corynebacterium jeikeium and Corynebacterium striatum were significantly overrepresented in the group with true infection, whereas Corynebacterium afermentans was significantly more common in the contamination group.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation Ofapi Coryne System for Identifying Coryneform Bacteria
    756 Y Clin Pathol 1994;47:756-759 Evaluation of API Coryne system for identifying coryneform bacteria J Clin Pathol: first published as 10.1136/jcp.47.8.756 on 1 August 1994. Downloaded from A Soto, J Zapardiel, F Soriano Abstract that are aerobe or facultatively aerobe, non- Aim-To identify rapidly and accurately spore forming organisms of the following gen- coryneform bacteria, using a commercial era: Corynebacterium, Listeria, Actinomyces, strip system. Arcanobacterium, Erysipelothrix, Oerskovia, Methods-Ninety eight strains of Cory- Brevibacterium and Rhodococcus. It also per- nebacterium species and 62 additional mits the identification of Gardnerella vaginalis strains belonging to genera Erysipelorix, which often has a diphtheroid appearance and Oerskovia, Rhodococcus, Actinomyces, a variable Gram stain. Archanobacterium, Gardnerella and We studied 160 organisms in total from dif- Listeria were studied. Bacteria were ferent species of the Corynebacterium genus, as identified using conventional biochemi- well as from other morphological related gen- cal tests and a commercial system (API- era or groups, some of them not included in Coryne, BioMerieux, France). Fresh rab- the API Coryne database. bit serum was added to fermentation tubes for Gardnerella vaginalis isolates. Results-One hundred and five out ofthe Methods 160 (65.7%) organisms studied were cor- The study was carried out on Gram positive rectly and completely identified by the bacilli belonging to the genera Coryne- API Coryne system. Thirty five (21.8%) bacterium, Erysipelothrix, Oerskovia, Rhodococcus, more were correctly identified with addi- Actinomyces, Arcanobacterium, Gardnerella and tional tests. Seventeen (10-6%) organisms Listeria included in the API Coryne database were not identified by the system and (table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Corynebacterium Jeikeium Jk0268 Constitutes for the 40 Amino Acid Long Poracj, Which Forms a Homooligomeric and Anion-Selective Cell Wall Channel
    Corynebacterium jeikeium jk0268 Constitutes for the 40 Amino Acid Long PorACj, Which Forms a Homooligomeric and Anion-Selective Cell Wall Channel Narges Abdali1., Enrico Barth2., Amir Norouzy1, Robert Schulz1, Werner M. Nau1, Ulrich Kleinekatho¨ fer1, Andreas Tauch3, Roland Benz1,2* 1 School of Engineering and Science, Jacobs University Bremen, Bremen, Germany, 2 Rudolf Virchow Center, DFG-Research Center for Experimental Biomedicine, University of Wu¨rzburg, Wu¨rzburg, Germany, 3 Institute for Genome Research and Systems Biology Center for Biotechnology (CeBiTec), Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany Abstract Corynebacterium jeikeium, a resident of human skin, is often associated with multidrug resistant nosocomial infections in immunodepressed patients. C. jeikeium K411 belongs to mycolic acid-containing actinomycetes, the mycolata and contains a channel-forming protein as judged from reconstitution experiments with artificial lipid bilayer experiments. The channel- forming protein was present in detergent treated cell walls and in extracts of whole cells using organic solvents. A gene coding for a 40 amino acid long polypeptide possibly responsible for the pore-forming activity was identified in the known genome of C. jeikeium by its similar chromosomal localization to known porH and porA genes of other Corynebacterium strains. The gene jk0268 was expressed in a porin deficient Corynebacterium glutamicum strain. For purification temporarily histidine-tailed or with a GST-tag at the N-terminus, the homogeneous protein caused channel-forming activity with an average conductance of 1.25 nS in 1M KCl identical to the channels formed by the detergent extracts. Zero-current membrane potential measurements of the voltage dependent channel implied selectivity for anions. This preference is according to single-channel analysis caused by some excess of cationic charges located in the channel lumen formed by oligomeric alpha-helical wheels.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerobic Gram-Positive Bacteria
    Aerobic Gram-Positive Bacteria Abiotrophia defectiva Corynebacterium xerosisB Micrococcus lylaeB Staphylococcus warneri Aerococcus sanguinicolaB Dermabacter hominisB Pediococcus acidilactici Staphylococcus xylosusB Aerococcus urinaeB Dermacoccus nishinomiyaensisB Pediococcus pentosaceusB Streptococcus agalactiae Aerococcus viridans Enterococcus avium Rothia dentocariosaB Streptococcus anginosus Alloiococcus otitisB Enterococcus casseliflavus Rothia mucilaginosa Streptococcus canisB Arthrobacter cumminsiiB Enterococcus durans Rothia aeriaB Streptococcus equiB Brevibacterium caseiB Enterococcus faecalis Staphylococcus auricularisB Streptococcus constellatus Corynebacterium accolensB Enterococcus faecium Staphylococcus aureus Streptococcus dysgalactiaeB Corynebacterium afermentans groupB Enterococcus gallinarum Staphylococcus capitis Streptococcus dysgalactiae ssp dysgalactiaeV Corynebacterium amycolatumB Enterococcus hiraeB Staphylococcus capraeB Streptococcus dysgalactiae spp equisimilisV Corynebacterium aurimucosum groupB Enterococcus mundtiiB Staphylococcus carnosusB Streptococcus gallolyticus ssp gallolyticusV Corynebacterium bovisB Enterococcus raffinosusB Staphylococcus cohniiB Streptococcus gallolyticusB Corynebacterium coyleaeB Facklamia hominisB Staphylococcus cohnii ssp cohniiV Streptococcus gordoniiB Corynebacterium diphtheriaeB Gardnerella vaginalis Staphylococcus cohnii ssp urealyticusV Streptococcus infantarius ssp coli (Str.lutetiensis)V Corynebacterium freneyiB Gemella haemolysans Staphylococcus delphiniB Streptococcus infantarius
    [Show full text]
  • Review Memorandum
    510(k) SUBSTANTIAL EQUIVALENCE DETERMINATION DECISION SUMMARY A. 510(k) Number: K181663 B. Purpose for Submission: To obtain clearance for the ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Positive (BCID-GP) Panel C. Measurand: Bacillus cereus group, Bacillus subtilis group, Corynebacterium, Cutibacterium acnes (P. acnes), Enterococcus, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium, Lactobacillus, Listeria, Listeria monocytogenes, Micrococcus, Staphylococcus, Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus lugdunensis, Streptococcus, Streptococcus agalactiae (GBS), Streptococcus anginosus group, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Streptococcus pyogenes (GAS), mecA, mecC, vanA and vanB. D. Type of Test: A multiplexed nucleic acid-based test intended for use with the GenMark’s ePlex instrument for the qualitative in vitro detection and identification of multiple bacterial and yeast nucleic acids and select genetic determinants of antimicrobial resistance. The BCID-GP assay is performed directly on positive blood culture samples that demonstrate the presence of organisms as determined by Gram stain. E. Applicant: GenMark Diagnostics, Incorporated F. Proprietary and Established Names: ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Positive (BCID-GP) Panel G. Regulatory Information: 1. Regulation section: 21 CFR 866.3365 - Multiplex Nucleic Acid Assay for Identification of Microorganisms and Resistance Markers from Positive Blood Cultures 2. Classification: Class II 3. Product codes: PAM, PEN, PEO 4. Panel: 83 (Microbiology) H. Intended Use: 1. Intended use(s): The GenMark ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Positive (BCID-GP) Panel is a qualitative nucleic acid multiplex in vitro diagnostic test intended for use on GenMark’s ePlex Instrument for simultaneous qualitative detection and identification of multiple potentially pathogenic gram-positive bacterial organisms and select determinants associated with antimicrobial resistance in positive blood culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Corynebacterium Species Isolated from Clinical Samples in Romania
    antibiotics Article Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Corynebacterium Species Isolated from Clinical Samples in Romania Cristiana Cerasella Dragomirescu 1,2, Brandusa Elena Lixandru 1, Ileana Luminita Coldea 1, Olguta Nicoleta Corneli 1, Marina Pana 1, Andi Marian Palade 1, Violeta Corina Cristea 3, Ioana Suciu 4, George Suciu 4, Loredana Sabina Cornelia Manolescu 2,* , Loredana Gabriela Popa 2,5 and Mircea Ioan Popa 1,2 1 “Cantacuzino” National Medico Military Institute for Research and Development, 050096 Bucharest, Romania; [email protected] (C.C.D.); [email protected] (B.E.L.); [email protected] (I.L.C.); [email protected] (O.N.C.); [email protected] (M.P.); [email protected] (A.M.P.); [email protected] (M.I.P.) 2 “Carol Davila” University of Medicine and Pharmacy, 050474 Bucharest, Romania; [email protected] 3 Central Reference Laboratory Synevo, 021408 Bucharest, Romania; [email protected] 4 BEIA Consult International, Peroni 16, 041386 Bucharest, Romania; [email protected] (I.S.); [email protected] (G.S.) 5 Colentina Clinical Hospital (CDPC), 020125 Bucharest, Romania * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +40-723-699-253 Received: 10 December 2019; Accepted: 14 January 2020; Published: 16 January 2020 Abstract: Antimicrobial resistance is one of the most important public health issues. Besides classical multidrug resistance species associated with medical care involved in superficial or invasive infections, there are strains less commonly associated with hospital or outpatient setting’s infections. Non-diphtheria Corynebacterium spp. could produce infections in patients with or without immune-compromised status. The aim of our study was to determine the susceptibility to antimicrobial agents to Corynebacterium spp.
    [Show full text]
  • Illumina Respiratory Pathogen ID/AMR Panel Table
    Illumina Respiratory Pathogen ID/AMR Panel • Identify COVID-19 and determine viral variants and lineages Analysis powered by • Detect both DNA- and RNA-based respiratory pathogens simultaneously • Report full genome coverage of SARS-CoV-2 and Influenza A/B viruses • Profile Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) gene expression concurrently BACTERIA Achromobacter Elizabethkingia Bartonella henselae Cardiobacterium hominis Haemophilus influenzae Mycobacterium gordonae denitrificans meningoseptica Achromobacter Enterobacter cloacae Haemophilus Bartonella quintana Cardiobacterium valvarum Mycobacterium kansasii xylosoxidans complex parahaemolyticus Haemophilus Mycobacterium Acinetobacter baumannii Bordetella bronchiseptica Chlamydia pneumoniae Enterococcus faecalis parainfluenzae malmoense Mycobacterium Acinetobacter lwoffii Bordetella hinzii Chlamydia psittaci Enterococcus faecium Haemophilus pittmaniae parascrofulaceum Acinetobacter Mycobacterium Bordetella holmesii Chlamydia trachomatis Escherichia coli Hafnia alvei nosocomialis scrofulaceum Chromobacterium Acinetobacter pittii Bordetella parapertussis Eubacterium brachy Klebsiella variicola Mycobacterium szulgai violaceum Mycobacterium Actinomyces graevenitzii Bordetella pertussis Citrobacter freundii Eubacterium limosum Kytococcus sedentarius tuberculosis Actinomyces israelii Bordetella petrii Citrobacter koseri Eubacterium nodatum Leclercia adecarboxylata Mycobacterium xenopi Mycobacteroides Corynebacterium abscessus Actinomyces meyeri Brucella abortus Finegoldia magna Legionella anisa diphtheriae
    [Show full text]