Brighton, Anjuli

Objective. To determine whether results of the nasopharyngeal FilmArray respiratory panel (NP-FARP) influenced antibiotic decisions. Methods. We reviewed the medical records of nonintensive care unit (ICU) inpatients that had an NP-FARP performed at our institution between June 2013 and June 2014. The inpatient records were reviewed 48 hours after the NP-FARP for the following data: demographic information; NP-FARP, serum procalcitonin, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal swab (MRSA NS) results; antibiotics prior and post-48 hours of the NP-FARP result; and the current immunosuppression status. Clinical outcome data were not obtained. Patients were categorized into those who had a positive (+) or a negative (−) NP-FARP. We further subdivided these two categories into groups A, B, and C based on the antibiotic modifications 48 hours after their NP-FARP result. Group A included patients who were never initiated on antimicrobial therapy. Patients whose antibiotics were discontinued or deescalated were placed in group B. Patients with antibiotic escalation or continuation without change constituted group C. We compared and analyzed groups A, B, and C in the (+) and (−) NP-FARP cohorts. Results. A total of 545 patients were included. There were 143 (26%) patients with positive and 402 (74%) patients with negative NP-FARPs. Comparison of groups A, B, and C between those with a (+) and (−) NP-FARP were as follows: (+) A and (−) A, 28/143 (20%) and 84/402 (21%); (+) B and (−) B, 59/143 (41%) and 147/402 (37%); and (+) C and (−) C, 56/143 (39%) and 171/402 (43%), respectively. We found no statistically significant differences between groups (+) A versus (−) A, (+) B versus (−) B, and (+) C versus (−) C with respect to age, gender, MRSA NS result, procalcitonin result, or concurrent immunosuppression. Conclusion. In non-ICU inpatients, NP-FARP alone or in combination with procalcitonin or MRSA NS did not influence antibiotic decisions during the study period.

ABSTRACT The FilmArray respiratory panel (FARP) reliably and rapidly identifies 17 viruses and 3 bacterial pathogens. A nasopharyngeal swab FARP (NP FARP) is performed for many patients with respiratory symptoms. For patients who are acutely ill or immunocompromised or fail to improve, a bronchoalveolar lavage sample FARP (BAL FARP) is performed in addition to the NP FARP. To date, no studies have compared the yield of a BAL FARP with that of an NP FARP. We retrospectively studied all patients who had a BAL FARP within 7 days after an NP FARP between June 2013 and May 2014. Demographic information, comorbidities, FARP results, and all microbiologic data from BAL fluid were collected. Eighty-six patients had a BAL FARP performed within 7 days (mean, 1.6; median, 1) after an NP FARP. Of these, 66 (77%) had concordant BAL and NP FARP results: 15 (23%) had the same pathogen identified from the NP and BAL FARPs, and 51 (77%) had concordant negative FARP results. In 18 of the 86 patients (21%), a pathogen was detected from the NP FARP; of these, 15 (83%) had a concordant match on a subsequent BAL FARP, and the remaining 3 had negative BAL FARPs. In 17 of the 86 patients (20%), pathogens were identified from the BAL FARPs that were not detected by the NP FARPs; of these, 16 (94%) had initial negative NP FARPs. The data suggest that once a pathogen is identified by an NP FARP, a subsequent BAL FARP is unlikely to add new microbiologic information. However, a BAL FARP may provide new, useful microbiologic information when performed within 7 days after a negative NP FARP.