Microorganisms (Feb 2020)

Classical Microbiological Diagnostics of Bacteremia: Are the Negative Results Really Negative? What is the Laboratory Result Telling Us About the “Gold Standard”?

  • Tomasz Źródłowski,
  • Joanna Sobońska,
  • Dominika Salamon,
  • Isabel M. McFarlane,
  • Mirosław Ziętkiewicz,
  • Tomasz Gosiewski

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8030346
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8, no. 3
p. 346

Abstract

Read online

Standard blood cultures require at least 24−120 h to be reported as preliminary positive. The objective of this study was to compare the reliability of Gram staining and fluorescent in-situ hybridization (FISH) for detecting bacteria in otherwise negative blood culture bottles. Ninety-six sets were taken from patients with a diagnosis of sepsis. Six incomplete blood culture sets and eight blood cultures sets demonstrating positive growth were excluded. We performed Gram stain and FISH on 82 sets taken from post-operative septic patients: 82 negative aerobic blood cultures, 82 anaerobic blood cultures, and 82 blood samples, as well as 57 blood samples taken from healthy volunteers. From the eighty-two blood sets analyzed from the septic patients, Gram stain visualized bacteria in 62.2% of blood samples, 35.4% of the negative aerobic bottles, and in 31.7% of the negative anaerobic bottles. Utilizing FISH, we detected bacteria in 75.6%, 56.1%, and 64.6% respectively. Among the blood samples from healthy volunteers, FISH detected bacteria in 64.9%, while Gram stain detected bacteria in only 38.6%. The time needed to obtain the study results using Gram stain was 1 h, for FISH 4 h, and for the culture method, considering the duration of growth, 5 days. Gram stain and FISH allow quick detection of bacteria in the blood taken directly from a patient. Finding phagocytosed bacteria, which were also detected among healthy individuals, confirms the hypothesis that blood microbiome exists.

Keywords