Bloodstream Infections: Comparison of Diagnostic Methods and Therapeutic Consequences between a Hospital in a Resource-Limited Setting and Two French Hospitals

Abstract

In recent years, the diagnosis of bloodstream infections has been complemented by rapid microbiological methods, unattainable to most clinical laboratories in resource-limited settings. We evaluated the impact of their shortage on antibiotic therapy adequacy. We conducted a prospective multicenter cohort study including 150 adult Gram-negative bacilli bacteremia episodes, evenly distributed across three university hospitals: one in Lebanon, a resource-limited setting, and two in France, a resource-rich setting. Previous colonization by multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) was significantly more prevalent among the Lebanese than the French group of patients (16/50 vs. 5/100; p Enterobacterales and other MDRO were higher among the Lebanese than the French group of patients (25/50 vs. 12/100; p < 0.01). For the French group, rapid identification of species and mechanisms of resistance significantly shortened turnaround time for definitive laboratory diagnosis and increased antibiotic therapy adequacy. No statistically significant differences were noted in targeted antibiotic therapy between the two groups. This study suggests that, in settings where bacterial resistance is prevalent, rapid microbiological methods have not provided any additional value. The clinical and economic impact of rapid microbiological methods will likely depend on local CPE, VRE, and other MDRO epidemiology and are areas for future research.

Keywords

• bloodstream infections
• resource-limited countries
• rapid microbiological methods
• antimicrobial resistance
• clinical outcomes