Abstract
BACKGROUND: Existing panels for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) are slow and lack quantification of important pathogens and antimicrobial resistance, which are not solely responsible for their complex etiology and antibiotic resistance. BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia (PN) panels may provide rapid information on their etiology. METHODS: The bronchoalveolar lavage fluid of 187 patients with LRTIs was simultaneously analyzed using a PN panel and cultivation, and the impact of the PN panel on clinical practice was assessed. The primary endpoint was to compare the consistency between the PN panel and conventional microbiology in terms of etiology and drug resistance, as well as to explore the clinical significance of the PN panel. The secondary endpoint was pathogen detection using the PN panel in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients with HAP and 130 with CAP were included. The most common pathogens of HAP were Acinetobacter baumannii and Klebsiella pneumoniae, with the most prevalent antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes being CTX-M and KPC. For CAP, the most common pathogens were Haemophilus influenzae and Staphylococcus aureus, with the most frequent AMR genes being CTX-M and VIM. Compared with routine bacterial culture, the PN panel demonstrated an 85% combined positive percent agreement (PPA) and 92% negative percent agreement (NPA) for the qualitative identification of 13 bacterial targets. PN detection of bacteria with higher levels of semi-quantitative bacteria was associated with more positive bacterial cultures. Positive concordance between phenotypic resistance and the presence of corresponding AMR determinants was 85%, with 90% positive agreement between CTX-M-type extended-spectrum beta-lactamase gene type and phenotype and 100% agreement for mecA/C and MREJ. The clinical benefit of the PN panel increased by 25.97% compared with traditional cultural tests. CONCLUSION: The bacterial pathogens and AMR identified by the PN panel were in good agreement with conventional cultivation, and the clinical benefit of the PN panel increased by 25.97% compared with traditional detection. Therefore, the PN panel is recommended for patients with CAP or HAP who require prompt pathogen diagnosis and resistance identification.