Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We evaluated the performance of the BioFire® FilmArray® Pneumonia panel (PN-panel) in detecting bacterial pathogens by comparing it to cultures and to the usefulness of the leukocyte esterase (LE) urine strip test. Between January and June 2022, a total of 67 sputum specimens were obtained from community-acquired pneumonia patients. The PN-panel and LE test were performed simultaneously with conventional cultures. The pathogen detection rates of the PN-panel and culture were 40/67 (59.7%) and 25/67 (37.3%), respectively. The concordance rate between the PN-panel and culture was high (76.9%) when the bacterial burden was high (107 copies/mL), but it was low (8.6%) when it was 104−6 copies/mL, irrespective of the sputum quality. According to the LE positivity, the overall culture positive rate and PN-panel positive rate were significantly higher among the LE-positive specimens (23/45, 31/45) than among the LE-negative specimens (2/21, 8/21). Moreover, the difference in concordance rate between the PN-panel test and culture was significant according to the LE positivity, but not the Gram stain grading. In conclusion, the PN-panel showed high concordance when the bacterial burden was high (107 copies/mL) and ancillary use of LE test will be helpful in interpreting the PN-panel results, especially when the copy number of bacterial pathogens is low.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoo et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: