Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Sep 29;11(5):e0300223.
doi: 10.1128/spectrum.03002-23. Online ahead of print.

The diagnostic utility of microscopic quality assessment of sputum samples in the era of rapid syndromic PCR testing

Affiliations

The diagnostic utility of microscopic quality assessment of sputum samples in the era of rapid syndromic PCR testing

Dagfinn Lunde Markussen et al. Microbiol Spectr. .

Abstract

This prospective study assessed the value of initial microscopy evaluation of sputum samples submitted for rapid syndromic PCR-based testing. Bacterial detections by the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia Panel plus in 126 high- and 108 low-quality sputum samples, based on initial microscopy evaluation in samples from patients with lower respiratory tract infections were compared. We found that high-quality samples had a higher proportion of bacterial detections compared to low-quality samples (P = 0.013). This included a higher proportion of detections of bacteria deemed clinically relevant by predefined criteria (70% and 55%, P = 0.016), as well as a higher proportion of detections of Haemophilus influenzae (36% and 20%, P = 0.010). High-quality samples also had more detections of bacteria with high semi-quantitative values. The study found no significant difference between high- and low-quality samples in the proportions of samples with a single species of bacteria detected, samples with a bacteria treated by the clinician, samples with detection of a proven etiology of community-acquired pneumonia by predefined criteria, the number of bacterial species detected, or the detection of Streptococcus pneumoniae, Moraxella catarrhalis, or Staphylococcus aureus. The results showed that 40% (95% CI 35%-47%) of the bacterial detections would have been missed if only high-quality samples were analyzed. This included 41% (27%-56%) of detections of S. pneumoniae, 33% (23%-45%) of detections of H. influenzae, 42% (28%-58%) of detections of S. aureus, and 37% (23%-54%) of detections of M. catarrhalis. These findings suggest that all sputum samples submitted for rapid syndromic PCR testing should be analyzed, regardless of initial microscopy quality assessment. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT04660084.) IMPORTANCE Microscopic quality assessment of sputum samples was originally designed for sputum culture, and its applicability in today's workflow, which includes syndromic PCR testing, may differ. Addressing this crucial gap, our study emphasizes the need to optimize the use and workflow of syndromic PCR panels, like the BioFire FilmArray Pneumonia plus (FAP plus), in microbiology laboratories. These advanced PCR-based tests offer rapid and comprehensive pathogen detection for respiratory infections, yet their full potential remains uncertain. By comparing bacterial detections in high- and low-quality sputum samples, we underscore the importance of including low-quality samples in testing. Our findings reveal a significant proportion of potentially clinically relevant bacterial detections that would have been missed if only high-quality samples were analyzed. These insights support the efficient implementation of syndromic PCR panels, ultimately enhancing patient care and outcomes.

Keywords: diagnostics; filmarray; gram stain; microcopy; molecular methods; pneumonia; quality assurance; rapid tests; sputum; syndromic PCR.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Flow chart of patients included in the study abbreviations: CAP, community-acquired pneumonia; LRT, lower respiratory tract; RTI, respiratory tract infection; LRTI, lower respiratory tract infection.

References

    1. Metlay JP, Waterer GW, Long AC, Anzueto A, Brozek J, Crothers K. 2019. Diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia. an official clinical practice guideline of the American Thoracic Society and infectious diseases society of America. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 200:e45–e67. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201908-1581ST - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Leber ALE. 2016. Respiratory tract cultures, p 3.11.1.1-3..9.4. In Clinical microbiology procedures handbook. DC: American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
    1. Reed WW, Byrd GS Jr, Gates RH, Howard RS, Weaver MJ. 1996. Sputum gram’s stain in community-acquired pneumococcal pneumonia. A meta-analysis. West J Med 165:197–204. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Nagendra S, Bourbeau P, Brecher S, Dunne M, LaRocco M, Doern G. 2001. Sampling variability in the microbiological evaluation of expectorated sputa and endotracheal aspirates. J Clin Microbiol 39:2344–2347. doi: 10.1128/JCM.39.6.2344-2347.2001 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cooper GM, Jones JJ, Arbique JC, Flowerdew GJ, Forward KR. 2000. Intra and inter technologist variability in the quality assessment of respiratory tract specimens. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 37:231–235. doi: 10.1016/s0732-8893(00)00156-5 - DOI - PubMed

Associated data

LinkOut - more resources