Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T04:29:54.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recurrent Pseudobacteremias Traced to a Radiometric Blood Culture Device

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Suzanne F. Bradley ,
Kenneth H. Wilson ,
Michael A. Rosloniec  and
Carol A. Kauffman
Suzanne F. Bradley*
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Kenneth H. Wilson
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Michael A. Rosloniec
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
Carol A. Kauffman
Affiliation:
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Department of Pathology, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Ann Arbor, Michigan University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, Michigan
*
Infectious Diseases Section, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Ann Arbor, MI 48105
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Five clusters of pseudobacteremias over a seven-month period were traced to a BACTEC® radiometric device. Four episodes were due to enterococcus and one involved Staphylococcus aureus. Each cluster began with multiple positive blood cultures from a patient with clinical evidence of bacteremia. On subsequent days each bottle in sequence yielded growth of the identical organism, as shown by phage typing and antibiograms. Cultures from patients believed to be infected with the organisms tested positive earlier (mean = 1.4 days) than those patients believed to be pseudobacteremic (mean = 4.8 days). Investigation pointed toward the BACTEC device as the most likely source. Resin beads were found in the needle on several occasions and were shown to be transferred from bottle to bottle. We postulated that contaminated resin beads or liquid from a positive bottle remained in the needle above the portion that was heat-sterilized, contaminating the next bottle when it was sampled.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 8 , Issue 7 , July 1987 , pp. 281 - 283
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 1987

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.Craven, DE, Lichtenberg, DA, Browne, KF, et al: Pseudobacteremia traced to cross-contamination by an automated blood culture analyzer, Infect Control 1984;5:75–78.Google Scholar
2.Donowitz, LG, Schwartzman, JD, Pseudobacteremia and use of the radiometric blood culture analyzer, infect Control 1984;5:266.Google Scholar
3.Greenhood, GP, Highsmith, AK, Allen, JR, et al: Klebsiella pneumoniae pseudobacteremia due to cross-contamination of a radiometric blood culture analyzer. Infect Control 1981;2:460–465.Google Scholar
4.Griffin, MR, Miller, AD, Davis, AC, Blood culture cross-contamination associated with a radiometric analyzer. J Clin Microbiol 1982:15:567–570.Google Scholar
5.Gurevich, I, Tafuro, SP, Krystofiak, SP, et al: Three clusters of bacillus pseudobacteremia related to a radiometric blood culture analyzer. Infect Control 1984;5:71–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Semel, JD, Trenholme, GM, Harris, AA, et al: Pseudomonas maltophilia pseudosepticemia. Am J Med 1978;64:403–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.DuClos, TW, Hodges, GR, Killian, JE, Bacterial contamination of blood-drawing equipment: A cause of false-positive blood cultures. Am J Med Sri 1973;266:459–463.Google Scholar
8.Craven, DE, Moody, B, Connolly, MG, et al: Pseudobacteremia caused by povidone-iodine solution contaminated with Pseudomonas cepacia. N Engl J Med 1981;305:621–623.Google Scholar
9.Noble, RC, Reeves, SA, Bacillus species Pseudosepsis caused by contaminated commercial blood media. JAMA 1974;230:1002–1004.Google Scholar
10.Faris, HM, Sparling, FF, Mima polymorpha bacteremia: False-positive cultures due to contaminated penicillinase. JAMA 1972;219:76–77.Google Scholar
11.Farber, BF, Rihs, JD, Cioetz, A, et al: A pseudo-outbreak of Streplomyces infections linked to laboratory- construction. Am J Clin Pathol 1984;82:453–455.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed