Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T01:32:28.919Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Pseudobacteremia Traced to Cross-Contamination by an Automated Blood Culture Analyzer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Donald E. Craven*
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Maxwell Finland Laboratory for Infectious Diseases, Boston City Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Deborah A. Lichtenberg
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Maxwell Finland Laboratory for Infectious Diseases, Boston City Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Kathleen F. Browne
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Maxwell Finland Laboratory for Infectious Diseases, Boston City Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Donna M. Coffey
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Maxwell Finland Laboratory for Infectious Diseases, Boston City Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
Thomas L. Treadwell
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Maxwell Finland Laboratory for Infectious Diseases, Boston City Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
William R. McCabe
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Boston University School of Medicine, Maxwell Finland Laboratory for Infectious Diseases, Boston City Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
*
Maxwell Finland Laboratory for Infectious Diseases, Boston City Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02118

Abstract

Twenty-three episodes of pseudobacteremia occurring over a seven-month period were traced to cross-contamination by the automated blood culture analyzer (BACTEC 460) used in the microbiology laboratory. An epidemiologic investigation of an unusual cluster of three patients with pseudobacteremia caused by oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus led to the identification of the problem. Mock trials of the blood culture procedure confirmed that the blood culture analyzer was the source of contamination. After the needle sterilizer was replaced by the manufacturer, the problem of cross-contamination abated. Contamination of sterile blood cultures by an instrument intended to identify bacteremia rapidly may lead to incorrect diagnosis, unnecessary administration of antibiotics and prolonged hospitalization. Because of the widespread use of automated blood culture analyzers in the US, physicians, microbiologists, and infection control personnel should be alert to the possibility of cross-contamination and the subtle way in which it may present.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Norden, CW, Pseudosepticemia. Ann Intern Med 1969;71:789790.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Faris, HM, Sparling, FF, Mima polymorpha bacteremia. False-positive cultures due to contaminated penicillinase. JAMA 1972;219:7677.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Duclos, TW, Hodges, GR, Killian, JE, Bacterial contamination of blood-drawing equipment; A cause of false-positive blood cultures. Am J Med Sci 1973;266:459463.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Noble, RC, Reeves, SA, Bacillus species Pseudosepsis caused by contaminated commercial blood culture media. JAMA 1974;230:10021004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Kaslow, RA, Mackel, DC, Mallison, GF, Nosocomial pseudobacteremia. Positive blood cultures due-to contaminated benzalkonium antiseptic. JAMA 1976;236:24072409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Coyle-Gilchrist, MM, Crewe, P, Roberts, G, Flavobacterium meningosepticum in the hospital environment. J Clin Pathol 1976;29:824826.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Hoffman, PC, Arnow, PM, Goldmann, DA, et al: False-positive blood cultures. Association with nonsterile blood collection tubes. JAMA 1976;236:20732075.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Semel, JD, Trenholme, GM, Harris, AA, et al: Pseudomonas maltophila pseudosepticemia. Am J Med 1978;64:403406.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Snydman, DR, Maloy, MF, Brock, SM, et al: Pseudobacteremia: False-positive blood cultures from mist tent contamination. Am J Epidemiol 1977;106:154159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Dolan, J, Joachim, GR, Khapra, A, et al: Pseudobacteremia due to Staphylococcus aureus. MMWR 1979;28:8283.Google Scholar
11.Lynch, JM, Anderson, A, Camacho, MJ, et al: Pseudobacteremia caused by Clostridium sedetti. Arch Intern Med 1980;140:6568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Spivack, ML, Shannon, R, Natsios, GA, et al: Two epidemics of pseudobacteremia due to Staphylococcus aureus and Aerococcus vir-idans. Infect Control 1980;1:321323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Craven, DE, Moody, B, Connolly, MG, et al: Pseudobacteremia caused by povidoneiodine solution contaminated with Pseudomonas cepacia. N Engl J Med 1981;305:621623.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Berkelman, RL, Lewin, S, Allen, JR, et al: Pseudobacteremia attributed to contamination of povidone-iodine with Pseudomonas cepacia. Ann Intern Med 1981;95:3236.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Weinstein, RA, Stamm, WE, Pseudoepidemics in hospital. Lancet 1977;2:862864.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Maki, DG, Through a glass darkly. Nosocomial pseudoepidemics and pseudobacteremias. Arch Intern Med 1980;140:2628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Greenhood, GP, Highsmith, AK, Aller, JR, et al: Klebsiella pneumoniae pseudobacteremia due to a radiometric blood culture analyzer. Infect Control 1981;2:460465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Griffin, MR, Miller, AD, Davis, AC, Blood culture contamination associated with a radiometric analyzer. J Clin Microbiol 1982;15:567570.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Craven, DE, Read, C, Kollisch, N, et al: A large outbreak of infections caused by a strain of Staphylococcus aureus resistant to oxacillin and aminoglycosides. Am J Med 1981;71:5358.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed