Milstone, Aaron M.

Abstract Objectives Evaluation of differences in the intestinal microbiome and resistome among high-risk patients (i.e. intensive care, oncology, transplant recipients) who are and are not colonized with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE). Methods One hundred and twelve rectal swabs were obtained from 85 patients with known CRE colonization status and cohorted. Long-read metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) was performed on rectal swabs. Microbiome and resistome analysis were performed by assessing α-diversity, β-diversity, relative abundance assessment and linear discriminant analysis effect size (LEfSe), comparing patients colonized (CRE positive) and not colonized (CRE negative) with CRE. Longitudinal analysis of sequential swabs collected over multiple hospital encounters on a subset of patients was performed at the patient level. Results The microbiomes of cohorts were similar when comparing α- and β-diversity measures and relative abundance. LEfSe analysis identified Gram-negative pathobionts enriched among CRE-positive samples and Gram-positive taxa enriched among CRE-negative samples. α-Diversity of the resistome differed at class, gene and allele levels. Relative abundance and LEfSe analysis demonstrated enrichment of genes conferring β-lactam resistance among CRE-positive patients; LEfSe also demonstrated enrichment of antimicrobial resistance genes to multiple antimicrobial classes. At the patient level, fluctuations in the microbiome and resistome among longitudinally collected swabs were associated with antibiotic exposure. Conclusions Differences between the microbiomes of CRE-positive- and CRE-negative-colonized patients at the cohort level were relatively muted, whereas statistically significant differences were observed among their resistomes. In patients followed longitudinally, shifts in microbiome and resistome composition were dramatic in between encounters and antibiotic exposures.

ABSTRACT Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) recommends a blood culture contamination (BCC) threshold of <3%, with ≤1% considered optimal. However, there is not a standardized definition of BCC, and the effect of multiple definitions on BCC rates or what definitions laboratories use remain unknown. We surveyed 52 hospitals and analyzed 362,078 blood cultures (BCx) collected 1 September 2019 to 31 August 2021 from 62 intensive care units (ICUs) and 231 wards from 48 of these hospitals. We calculated and compared BCC rates using the College of American Pathologists (CAP) or CLSI criteria (both utilize a limited number of skin commensals to define BCC) and the comprehensive National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) commensal list. We characterized factors associated with BCC and related outcomes (central-line associated bloodstream infection [CLABSI] and vancomycin use). BCC, BCx positivity, and single BCx rates were monitored by 100%, 39%, and 21% of hospitals, respectively. Hospitals used CAP (65%), CLSI (17%), and NHSN (17%) criteria to define BCC. Mean BCC rate by CAP (CAP-BCC) was 1.38% for ICUs and 0.96% for wards. BCC rates remained similar by CLSI criteria but increased when using NHSN list. Sharing BCC data outside of the laboratory, measuring additional BCx quality indicators, and limiting central catheter-drawn BCx were associated with lower BCC rates. BCC was associated with higher CLABSI rates in ICUs. This study demonstrated variability in laboratory practices and opportunities to optimize BCx stewardship. IMPORTANCE Blood culture contamination (BCC) is associated with patient harm and unnecessary use of healthcare resources. BCC thresholds have been established; however, multiple BCC definitions exist. There is limited data on how BCC rates differ depending on the BCC definition used, what definitions laboratories most commonly use, or their approach to other blood cultures (BCx) quality indicators such as single rates or BCx positivity. A cross-sectional multicenter survey and analysis of BCx data from intensive care unit and wards revealed that most laboratories did not track single BCx or BCx positivity rates and that there was variability in how BCC was defined. Additionally, BCC rates were influenced by the definition used. BCC was associated with increased central-line associated bloodstream infection rates.