Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:47:08.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VanA rectal swab screening as a predictor of subsequent vancomycin-resistant enterococcal bloodstream infection in critically ill adults

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 October 2020

Shawn J. Kram Open the ORCID record for Shawn J. Kram [Opens in a new window] ,
Bridgette L. Kram Open the ORCID record for Bridgette L. Kram [Opens in a new window] ,
Jennifer M. Schultheis ,
Michelle M. Kuhrt ,
Andrew S. McRae  and
Deverick J. Anderson
Shawn J. Kram*
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacy, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
Bridgette L. Kram
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacy, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
Jennifer M. Schultheis
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacy, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
Michelle M. Kuhrt
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacy, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina
Andrew S. McRae
Affiliation:
Department of Pharmacy, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee
Deverick J. Anderson
Affiliation:
Department of Infectious Diseases, Duke University Hospital, Durham, North Carolina Duke Center for Antimicrobial Stewardship and Infection Prevention, Durham, North Carolina
*
Author for correspondence: Shawn Kram, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

To evaluate whether vanA rectal screening for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) predicts vancomycin resistance for patients with enterococcal bloodstream infection (BSI).

Design:

A retrospective cohort study.

Setting:

Large academic medical center.

Methods:

The predictive performance of a vanA rectal swab was evaluated in 161 critically ill adults with an enterococcal BSI from January 1, 2007, to September 1, 2014, and who had a vanA rectal swab screening obtained within 14 days prior to blood culture.

Results:

Of the patients meeting inclusion criteria, 83 (51.6%) were vanA swab positive. Rectal-swab–positive patients were more likely to be younger, to be immunocompromised, to have an indwelling central vascular catheter, and to have a history of MDR bacteria. The vanA rectal swab had sensitivity and negative predictive values of 83.6% and 85.9%, respectively, and specificity and positive predictive values of 71.3% and 67.5%, respectively, for predicting a vancomycin-resistant enterococcal BSI in critically ill adults.

Conclusions:

VanA rectal swabs may be useful for antimicrobial stewardship at institutions with VRE screening already in place for infection control purposes. A higher PPV would be warranted to implement a universal vanA screen on all ICU patients.

Type
Original Article
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 42 , Issue 4 , April 2021 , pp. 411 - 416
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America

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

Pfaller, MA, Cormican, M, Flamm, RK, Mendes, RE, Jones, RN. Temporal and geographic variation in antimicrobial susceptibility and resistance patterns of enterococci: results from the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program, 1997–2016. Open Forum Infect Dis 2019;6:S54–S62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiner-Lastinger, LM, Abner, S, Edwards, JR, et al. Antimicrobial-resistant pathogens associated with adult healthcare-associated infections: summary of data reported to the National Healthcare Safety Network, 2015–2017. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2020;41:1–18. doi: 10.1017/ice.2019.296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, A, Roberts, D, Wood, KE, et al. Duration of hypotension before initiation of effective antimicrobial therapy is the critical determinant of survival in human septic shock. Crit Care Med 2006;34:1589–1596.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zasowski, EJ, Claeys, KC, Lagnf, AM, Davis, SL, Rybak, MJ. Time is of the essence: the impact of delayed antibiotic therapy on patient outcomes in hospital-onset enterococcal bloodstream infections. Clin Infect Dis 2016;62:1242–1250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Muto, CA, Jernigan, JA, Ostrowsky, BE, et al. SHEA guideline for preventing nosocomial transmission of multidrug-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus . Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2003;24:362–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Angelis, G, Cataldo, MA, De Waure, C, et al. Infection control and prevention measures to reduce the spread of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2014;69:1185–1192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, DJ, Murthy, R, Munoz-Price, LS, et al. Reconsidering contact precautions for endemic methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus . Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36:1163–1172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huskins, WC, Huckabee, CM, O’Grady, NP, et al. Intervention to reduce transmission of resistant bacteria in intensive care. N Engl J Med 2011;364:1407–1418.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sarikonda, KV, Micek, ST, Doherty, JA, Reichley, RM, Warren, D, Kollef, MH. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization is a poor predictor of intensive care unit-acquired methicillin-resistant S aureus infections requiring antibiotic treatment. Crit Care Med 2010;38:1991–1995.Google ScholarPubMed
Butler-Laporte, G, Cheng, MP, McDonald, EG, Lee, TC. Using VRE screening tests to predict vancomycin resistance in enterococcal bacteremia. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2020:41:425–429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liou, DZ, Barmparas, G, Ley, EJ, et al. To swab or not to swab? A prospective analysis of 341 SICU VRE screens. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 2014;76:1192–1200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tavadze, M, Rybicki, L, Mossad, S, et al. Risk factors for vancomycin-resistant enterococcus bacteremia and its influence on survival after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2014;49:1310–1316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brasg, I, Elligsen, M, MacFadden, D, Daneman, N. Predictive utility of swab screening for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus in selection of empiric antibiotics for Enterococcus sterile-site infections: a retrospective cohort study. CMAJ Open 2017;5:E632–E637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferreira, FL, Bota, DP, Bross, A, Mélot, C, Vincent, JL. Serial evaluation of the SOFA score to predict outcome in critically ill patients. JAMA 2001;286:1754–1758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Alevizakos, M, Gaitanidis, A, Nasioudis, D, Tori, K, Flokas, ME, Mylonakis, E. Colonization with vancomycin-resistant enterococci and risk for bloodstream infection among patients with malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Forum Infect Dis 2017;4:ofw246. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofw246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhavnani, SM, Drake, JA, Forrest, A, et al. A nationwide, multicenter, case-control study comparing risk factors, treatment, and outcome for vancomycin-resistant and -susceptible enterococcal bacteremia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2000;36:145–158.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Kram et al. supplementary material

Kram et al. supplementary material

Download Kram et al. supplementary material(File)
File 14.3 KB