Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Introduction: In patients with suspected pneumonia who are tested with respiratory culture and multiplex PCR, the potential added benefit of next-generation sequencing technologies is unknown. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective study in which residual bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) specimens were retrieved from hospitalized patients. We compared its research-use-only Respiratory Pathogen Illumina Panel (RPIP) results to culture and BioFire® FilmArray Pneumonia Panel (BioFire® PN) results from critically ill patients. Results: In total, 47 BAL specimens from 47 unique patients were included. All BAL samples were tested with culture and multiplex PCR. In total, 38 of the 47 BALs were consistent with a clinical picture of pneumonia per chart review. Additional testing of the 38 samples with the RPIP identified a new bacterium in 20 patients, a new virus in 4 patients, a new bacterium plus virus in 4 patients, and no additional organisms in 10 patients. In 17 (44.5%) of these patients, the RPIP results could have indicated an antibiotic addition. Compared with cultures, the RPIP had an overall sensitivity of 64% and specificity of 98%, with a 0% sensitivity for fungus and 14% sensitivity for mycobacteria. Compared with BioFire® PN, the RPIP was 70% sensitive and 99% specific, with a 74% sensitivity for bacteria and 33% sensitivity for viruses. The RPIP was 29% more sensitive for HAP/VAP bacterial targets compared with CAP. Conclusions: Emerging NGS technologies such as the RPIP may have a role in identifying the etiology of pneumonia, even when patients have BAL culture and multiplex PCR results available. Similar to prior studies evaluating RPIP, our study showed this platform lacked sensitivity when compared with cultures, particularly for fungi and mycobacteria. However, the high specificity of the test can be leveraged when clinicians are seeking to rule out certain infections.
Kling et al. (Sat,) studied this question.