Investigation: two potential false positive serratia marcescens results on the biofire bcid2 panel for the same patient were reported after testing a patient blood culture sample.Both tests were performed on (b)(6) 2024.The patient was not affected due to the biofire bcid2 result.No serious injury or death occurred.Conclusion: the investigation determined that the most likely cause of the discrepant s.Marcescens result was the presence of non-viable organism/nucleic acid in the blood culture media bottle.While blood culture vials are autoclaved and routinely quality controlled for sterility, non-viable organisms or nucleic acids can remain in the blood culture media after the sterilization process.The presence of non-viable organisms and nucleic acid does not compromise the intended use of blood culture media, culturing viable microorganisms; however, the biofire bcid2 panel does not distinguish between nucleic acid from viable or non-viable organisms.The biofire bcid2 panel is working as intended.The "laboratory precaution" and "limitation" sections of the biofire bcid2 panel instructions for use (ifu) (www.Online-ifu.Com/iti0048) outlines the potential for false positive detections during molecular testing with sterile blood culture media containing detectable levels of non-viable organisms and/or nucleic acid.Importantly, results from the biofire bcid2 panel are intended to be correlated with the clinical history, epidemiological data, and other data available to the clinician evaluating the patient.All identification results provided by the biofire bcid2 panel are intended to be interpreted in conjunction with gram stain results.Clinical performance: according to table 33.Biofire bcid2 panel clinical performance summary, enterobacterales of the biofire bcid2 panel ifu, the performance claim for the s.Marcescens assay compared to standard manual and automated microbiological/biochemical identification methods showed an overall sensitivity of 100% (95% ci 87.5-100%) and an overall specificity of 100% (95% ci 99.7-100%).
|
Summary: (b)(6) hospital (astoria, oregon) reported two potential false positive serratia marcescens results on the biofire blood culture identification 2 (bcid2) panel on the same patient after testing a patient blood culture sample.Due to the biofire bcid2 panel results, the patient was not affected.The investigation determined that the most likely cause of the discrepant s.Marcescens results was the presence of non-viable organism/nucleic acid in the blood culture media bottle.
|