Comparison of Isolation Media for Recovery of Burkholderia cepacia Complex from Respiratory Secretions of Patients with Cystic Fibrosis

Burkholderia cepacia selective agar (BCSA) has previously been devised for isolation of B. cepacia from respiratory secretions of patients with cystic fibrosis and tested under research laboratory conditions. Here we describe a study in which BCSA, oxidation-fermentation polymyxin bacitracin lactose agar (OFPBL), and Pseudomonas cepacia agar (PCA) were compared in routine culture procedures for the ability to grow B. cepacia and inhibit other organisms. Three hundred twenty-eight specimens from 209 patients at two pediatric centers and 328 specimens from 109 adults were tested. Plates were inoculated, incubated, and read for quality and quantity of growth at 24, 48, and 72 h. Five (1.5%) specimens from 4 (1.9%) children and 75 (22.9%) specimens from 16 (14.7%) adults grew B. cepacia complex. At 24, 48, and 72 h, BCSA achieved 43, 93, and 100% detection, respectively; OFPBL achieved 26, 84, and 96%, respectively; and PCA achieved 33, 74, and 84% detection, respectively. Quality was assessed as pinpoint or good growth. At 24 h, most cultures growing B. cepacia complex had pinpoint colonies. By 48 and 72 h, 48 and 69% of B. cepacia complex cultures, respectively, had good growth on BCSA, while on OFPBL 19 and 30%, respectively, had good growth and on PCA 11 and 18%, respectively, had good growth. BCSA was superior to OFPBL and PCA in suppressing organisms other than B. cepacia complex; 40 non-B. cepacia complex organisms were isolated from BCSA, 263 were isolated from OFPBL, and 116 were isolated from PCA. We conclude that BCSA is superior to OFPBL and PCA in its ability to support the growth of B. cepacia complex and to suppress other respiratory organisms

Evaluation of prognostic risk models for postoperative pulmonary complications in adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery: a systematic review and international external validation cohort study

Background Stratifying risk of postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery allows clinicians to modify risk through targeted interventions and enhanced monitoring. In this study, we aimed to identify and validate prognostic models against a new consensus definition of postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods We did a systematic review and international external validation cohort study. The systematic review was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We searched MEDLINE and Embase on March 1, 2020, for articles published in English that reported on risk prediction models for postoperative pulmonary complications following abdominal surgery. External validation of existing models was done within a prospective international cohort study of adult patients (≥18 years) undergoing major abdominal surgery. Data were collected between Jan 1, 2019, and April 30, 2019, in the UK, Ireland, and Australia. Discriminative ability and prognostic accuracy summary statistics were compared between models for the 30-day postoperative pulmonary complication rate as defined by the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine Core Outcome Measures in Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC). Model performance was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROCC). Findings In total, we identified 2903 records from our literature search; of which, 2514 (86·6%) unique records were screened, 121 (4·8%) of 2514 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 29 unique prognostic models were identified. Nine (31·0%) of 29 models had score development reported only, 19 (65·5%) had undergone internal validation, and only four (13·8%) had been externally validated. Data to validate six eligible models were collected in the international external validation cohort study. Data from 11 591 patients were available, with an overall postoperative pulmonary complication rate of 7·8% (n=903). None of the six models showed good discrimination (defined as AUROCC ≥0·70) for identifying postoperative pulmonary complications, with the Assess Respiratory Risk in Surgical Patients in Catalonia score showing the best discrimination (AUROCC 0·700 [95% CI 0·683–0·717]). Interpretation In the pre-COVID-19 pandemic data, variability in the risk of pulmonary complications (StEP-COMPAC definition) following major abdominal surgery was poorly described by existing prognostication tools. To improve surgical safety during the COVID-19 pandemic recovery and beyond, novel risk stratification tools are required. Funding British Journal of Surgery Society