Outbreak of pseudobacteremia due to multidrug-susceptible Enterococcus faecium.
L. Baddour,E. Harris,M. Huycke,A. E. Smith,I. Himelright
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/517791
IF: 20.999
1999-06-01
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Abstract:Enterococci rarely cause meningitis [1] or pneumonitis [2], and secondary bacteremia due to these infections is rarer still. Four recent cases of multidrug-susceptible Enterococcus faecium bacteremia identified over a 48-hour period were intensively investigated. Three cases were associated with community-acquired pneumonia, and one was associated with meningoencephalitis. Herein, we report what proved to be an epidemic of pseudobacteremia due to multidrug-susceptible E. faecium. The University of Tennessee Medical Center at Knoxville is a 602-bed acute-care center that serves as a level 1 trauma center for the region and provides several residency training programs. An epidemiological investigation was initiated after two patients Figure 1. Clamped homogeneous electric field electrophoresis patfor whom blood cultures were positive for multidrug-susceptible terns of blood and stool isolates of enterococci. Lanes 2–5, blood E. faecium were identified. Two additional cases were subseisolate of multidrug-susceptible Enterococcus faecium from four patients with pseudobacteremia; lanes 6 and 7, stool isolates of E. faequently identified. Locations from hospital admission until colleccium from a control phlebotomist; lane 8, stool isolate of E. faecium tion of blood specimens for culture were identified for each case, from a second control phlebotomist; lane 9, stool isolate of Enterococmedical procedures performed were reviewed, and all health care cus faecalis from a third control phlebotomist; and lanes 1 and 10, personnel in contact with the patients were identified. identical DNA ladders (kilobases). For comparative purposes, the number of blood specimens drawn daily for culture during the outbreak was determined. In addition, blood culture results for the 6 months before and after The four patients were all housed on different wards at the the outbreak were reviewed. medical center. The two patients admitted through the emergency Environmental specimens for culture were obtained Ç1 week department were seen on different days and while there were after the first positive blood culture. housed in different rooms. The four patients shared no common Stools were collected from one patient (case 1) and several health care providers except one phlebotomist who drew every set health care providers to further assess potential sources for the of blood specimens from which E. faecium was isolated. No patient multidrug-susceptible E. faecium. A portion of each stool (0.5– underwent a surgical procedure. 1 g) was weighed, homogenized in brain-heart infusion broth conAlthough the technique of the identified phlebotomist was initaining 15% glycerol, and frozen at0207C. Upon thawing, samples tially questioned, no deviation from protocols was noted upon were diluted in sterile PBS and spread on bile-esculin azide agar careful review with the phlebotomist. She appropriately wore disfor the semiselective isolation of all enterococci and on citrate posable gloves for all phlebotomies and followed correct proceazide Tween80 (Sigma, St. Louis) carbonate agar for the selective dures for skin disinfection and collection of blood specimens for isolation of Enterococcus faecalis and E. faecium [3]. Isolates were culture. No other phlebotomist shared her supplies. The identified identified by using the API 20S kit (Analytab Products, Plainview, phlebotomist did recall having a small finger laceration at the time NY). Genomic and plasmid DNA samples from blood and stool of the outbreak, but the wound healed without medical attention. isolates of enterococci were compared by using clamped homogeNo enterococci were recovered from numerous cultures of swab neous electric field electrophoresis as previously described [4]. specimens from the identified phlebotomist’s tray, including those Twelve (10%) of 117 sets of cultures of blood specimens from from the tape-wrapped handle, interior and exterior surfaces, neeeight patients during the 3 days of the outbreak yielded a variety dle disposal box, tube rack, and individually packaged skin prep. of bacteria, while seven (58%) of 12 sets of cultures of blood Approximately 1 week later, all cultures were repeated with use specimens from the four patients yielded E. faecium (P õ .001 of wet swabs (thioglycolate broth). None yielded enterococci. Stool by the x test). For the four cases, culture bottles yielding from one patient (case 1) was negative for enterococci. Cultures E. faecium were not in consecutive order with respect to other of stools collected 3 months after the outbreak from three nonimplicases. cated phlebotomists yielded E. faecalis and E. faecium from two samples and E. faecalis from one specimen. No enterococci, however, were isolated from stool, buccal, or hand swab samples provided by the implicated phlebotomist. Finally, additional isolates Reprints or correspondence: Dr. Larry M. Baddour, Department of Medicine, of multidrug-susceptible E. faecium were not recovered from any Section of Infectious Diseases, University of Tennessee Medical Center at other blood cultures during the 6 months following the outbreak. Knoxville, 1924 Alcoa Highway U-114, Knoxville, Tennessee 37920 (lbadDuring the 6 months immediately preceding the outbreak, only dour@mc.utmck.edu). three sets of blood cultures had yielded E. faecium, and two of Clinical Infectious Diseases 1999;28:1333–4 these sets of blood specimens were from the same patient. All q 1999 by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. 1058–4838/99/2806–0033$03.00 three isolates were resistant to penicillin and had resistance to high