Open AccessComparison of Multiplex Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel and Conventional Stool Testing for Evaluation of Patients With HIV Infection
Author(s) -
J Sobczyk,
Sonia Jain,
Xiaoying Sun,
Maile Y. Karris,
Darcy Wooten,
Janet Stagnaro,
Sharon L. Reed
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
open forum infectious diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.546
H-Index - 35
ISSN - 2328-8957
DOI - 10.1093/ofid/ofz547
Subject(s) - medicine , clostridium difficile , pathogen , metronidazole , feces , multiplex , gastroenterology , antibiotics , immunology , microbiology and biotechnology , biology , bioinformatics
Background Gastrointestinal pathogen panels (GPPs) are increasingly used to identify stool pathogens, but their impact in people with HIV (PWH) is unknown. We performed a retrospective cohort study comparing GPP and conventional stool evaluation in PWH. Methods We included all PWH who underwent GPP (Biofire Diagnostics; implemented September 15, 2015) or conventional testing, including stool culture, Clostridium difficile polymerase chain reaction testing, fluorescent smears for Cryptosporidium or Giardia, and ova and parasite exams (O&P) from 2013 to 2017. A total of 1941 specimens were tested, with 169 positive specimens detected in 144 patients. We compared result turnaround time, pathogen co-infection, antibiotic treatment, and treatment outcomes between positive specimens detected by conventional testing vs GPP. Results Overall, 124 patient samples tested positive by GPP, compared with 45 patient specimens by conventional testing. The GPP group demonstrated a higher co-infection rate (48.4% vs 13.3%; P < .001) and quicker turnaround time (23.4 vs 71.4 hours; P < .001). The GPP identified 29 potential viral infections that were undetectable by conventional stool tests. Unnecessary anti-infective therapy was avoided in 9 of 11 exclusively viral infections. Exclusively nonpathogenic parasites (n = 13) were detected by conventional stool tests, the majority of which were treated with metronidazole. There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between groups. Conclusions In PWH, GPP implementation improved antibiotic stewardship through shorter turnaround times and detection of enteric viral pathogens.