Paired blood cultures increase the sensitivity for detecting pathogens in both inpatients and outpatients
The objective of this study was to show the differences between paired blood cultures (PBC) versus single blood cultures (SBC) in the microbiologic yield, the sensitivity to detect pathogens and the time to positivity (TTP). We performed a retrospective study examining 112,570 blood culture samples over a 5-year period from July 2011 to May 2016 in the BacT/ALERT® 3D automated blood culture system (bioMérieux, Marcy l’Etoile, France). Bacteria and yeasts were identified using the VITEK® 2 Compact system (bioMérieux, Marcy l’Etoile, France). True-positives and contaminated bottles were defined and analysed separately. We analysed TTP and adherence to blood volume guidelines for a convenience sample of 510 and 999 sequential positive cultures, respectively. Out of 49,438 PBC samples, 5810 (11.7%) were positive. In 63,132 SBC samples, 4552 (7.2%) were positive (p < 0.0001). In PBC, 5371 (10.9%) were true-positives and 439 (0.9%) contaminants. In SBC, 4095 (6.5%) were true-positives and 457 (0.7%) contaminants. In the inpatient departments (IPD), the most common isolate was Escherichia coli (n = 1373), followed by Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 1206), whereas in the outpatient departments (OPD), the most common isolates were Salmonella typhi (n = 612) and S. paratyphi A (n = 278). In the analysis of TTP, 98% grew within 72 h, 91% within 48 h and 89% within 36 h. In the blood volume analysis, 90% of the cultures had optimal blood volume. A significantly higher positivity rate was seen in PBC compared with SBC. Our study adds to the increasing evidence of improved microbial yield of clinically significant bacteria and fungi by performing PBC instead of SBC and adhering to blood volume collection guidelines.
The authors thankfully acknowledge the unrelenting efforts and technical expertise provided by Dr. Navjeet Singh, Head Medical Affairs, bioMérieux India. We also acknowledge Dr. Arunaloke Chakrabarti, HOD Microbiology, PGIMER Chandigarh and Dr. Shivaprakash M Rudramurthy for their support regarding further confirmation testing of samples.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Ethical approval from institute
- 1.Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, Annane D, Gerlach H, Opal SM, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Douglas IS, Jaeschke R, Osborn TM, Nunnally ME, Townsend SR, Reinhart K, Kleinpell RM, Angus DC, Deutschman CS, Machado FR, Rubenfeld GD, Webb SA, Beale RJ, Vincent JL, Moreno R; Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines Committee including the Pediatric Subgroup (2013) Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med 41:580–637CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) (2007) Principles and procedures for blood cultures; Approved guideline. CLSI document M47-A, volume 27 number 17Google Scholar
- 9.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) BSI event protocol, , January 2017. Available online at: https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/pdfs/pscmanual/4psc_clabscurrent.pdf
- 13.Rudramurthy SM, Chakrabarti A, Paul RA, Sood P, Kaur H, Capoor MR, Kindo AJ, Marak RSK, Arora A, Sardana R, Das S, Chhina D, Patel A, Xess I, Tarai B, Singh P, Ghosh A (2017) Candida auris candidaemia in Indian ICUs: analysis of risk factors. J Antimicrob Chemother 72:1794–1801CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Mirrett S, Weinstein MP, Reimer LG, Wilson ML, Reller LB (1993) Interpretation of coagulase-negative staphylococci in blood cultures: does the number of positive bottles help? [Abstract C69.] In: Program and abstracts of the 93rd General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology, Atlanta, Georgia, May 1993. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, 458 ppGoogle Scholar