Comparison of the certified Copan eSwab system with commercially available cotton swabs for the detection of multidrug-resistant bacteria in rectal swabs.
Intestinal colonization
MRSA
Multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria
Q-tips
Screening
VRE
Journal
American journal of infection control
ISSN: 1527-3296
Titre abrégé: Am J Infect Control
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8004854
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2022
10 2022
Historique:
received:
20
12
2021
revised:
03
02
2022
accepted:
03
02
2022
pubmed:
15
2
2022
medline:
28
9
2022
entrez:
14
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Rectal swabs are well-implemented screening tools for multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDRB). Since certified swabs such as the Copan eSwab system experienced a delivery bottleneck during the COVID-19 pandemic, commercially available alternatives such as commonly used double-tipped cotton swabs had to be investigated, especially considering their similarity to professional cotton swabs for microbiological purposes. Diagnostic properties of commercial cotton swabs (comparable to Q-tips) and Copan eSwabs were qualitatively compared in a prospective single-center study using microbiological standard cultures and PCR methods for the detection of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE). A total of 196 swab pairs were collected from 164 participants. MDRB were detected in 36 of 164 cases (22%). There were neither false-negative nor false-positive results using commercial cotton swabs. In 8 of 196 samples (4.1%) MDRB species were detected only by using cotton swabs, including vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium, OXA-48 producing Escherichia coli, ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae and ESBL-producing Escherichia coli. Commercial cotton swabs turned out to be a reliable alternative to Copan eSwabs. For practical use as a screening tool, relevant storage- and manufacturer-related contamination must be ruled out beforehand. Commonly available double-tipped cotton swabs can be used for rectal MDRB screening in the event of supply shortages of certified swabs. Further studies should clarify their suitability as a sampling system for nasopharyngeal MRSA carriage or even for the molecular biological detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Rectal swabs are well-implemented screening tools for multidrug-resistant bacteria (MDRB). Since certified swabs such as the Copan eSwab system experienced a delivery bottleneck during the COVID-19 pandemic, commercially available alternatives such as commonly used double-tipped cotton swabs had to be investigated, especially considering their similarity to professional cotton swabs for microbiological purposes.
METHODS
Diagnostic properties of commercial cotton swabs (comparable to Q-tips) and Copan eSwabs were qualitatively compared in a prospective single-center study using microbiological standard cultures and PCR methods for the detection of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE).
RESULTS
A total of 196 swab pairs were collected from 164 participants. MDRB were detected in 36 of 164 cases (22%). There were neither false-negative nor false-positive results using commercial cotton swabs. In 8 of 196 samples (4.1%) MDRB species were detected only by using cotton swabs, including vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium, OXA-48 producing Escherichia coli, ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae and ESBL-producing Escherichia coli.
DISCUSSION
Commercial cotton swabs turned out to be a reliable alternative to Copan eSwabs. For practical use as a screening tool, relevant storage- and manufacturer-related contamination must be ruled out beforehand.
CONCLUSIONS
Commonly available double-tipped cotton swabs can be used for rectal MDRB screening in the event of supply shortages of certified swabs. Further studies should clarify their suitability as a sampling system for nasopharyngeal MRSA carriage or even for the molecular biological detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35158014
pii: S0196-6553(22)00069-4
doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2022.02.002
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Vancomycin
6Q205EH1VU
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1145-1149Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.