Why the study?
Sonicate fluid culture fails to identify a causative organism in approximately 50% of CIED infections, prompting evaluation of 16S rRNA gene PCR/sequencing.
Does 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing of sonicate fluid improve the detection of bacteria compared to standard culture in patients with extracted CIEDs?
Does 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing of sonicate fluid improve the detection of bacteria compared to standard culture in patients with extracted CIEDs?
16S rRNA PCR/sequencing of sonicate fluid from extracted CIEDs provides higher sensitivity for detecting bacterial pathogens compared to standard culture, particularly in culture-negative cases.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May aid diagnosis of culture-negative CIED infections; leaves open effects on management and outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Sonicate fluid (SF), a solution derived from vortexing and sonication of explanted cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs), is a higher-yield specimen compared with swabs or tissues for culture-based detection of microorganisms associated with CIED infection. Despite this, SF culture fails to identify a causative organism in ~50% of cases. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of 16S ribosomal RNA gene (rRNA) polymerase chain reaction (PCR)/sequencing of SF and compare it with that of SF culture. METHODS: We identified 322 SF specimens from extracted CIEDs and reviewed clinical data for each patient. Subjects were classified as having or not having CIED infection. Cases were subcategorized as culture negative if no significant growth was reported from SF cultures and as culture positive if an organism was detected above predefined thresholds. 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing was performed, with the organisms identified reported according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines for sequence data interpretation. RESULTS: A total of 278 SF samples corresponded to infected cases, of which 160 were culture positive and 118 culture negative. The remaining 44 were from noninfected cases, of which 2 were culture positive. Compared with SF culture, the sensitivity of 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing was higher (64% vs 57.5%, P = .003). 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing detected a potential pathogen in 28 of 118 culture-negative cases, identifying staphylococci in the majority (18/28). CONCLUSIONS: 16S rRNA PCR/sequencing has higher sensitivity to detect bacteria in SF from extracted CIEDs than does SF culture.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garrigos et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: