Despite being implicated in a wide spectrum of community- and healthcare-acquired infections, anaerobes have not yet been incorporated into systematic surveillance programs in Europe. We conducted a multicentre retrospective observational study analysing all anaerobic strains isolated from blood cultures in 44 European Hospital Centres over a 4-y period (2020-2023). Diagnostic approach, epidemiology, and antimicrobial susceptibility according to EUCAST v. 15.0 were investigated. Our study included 14,527 anaerobes, most of which were Gram-positive (45%) or Gram-negative (40%) bacilli. MALDI-TOF coupled to mass spectrometry was the most widely used tool for species identification (98%). Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed in the vast majority of centres, using mostly gradient diffusion strip (77%) and disk diffusion (45%) methods according to EUCAST guidelines. The most prevalent species were Cutibacterium acnes (18.7%), Bacteroides fragilis (16.3%), Clostridium perfringens (5.3%), Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron (4.2%), Fusobacterium nucleatum (3.5%), and Parvimonas micra (3.4%). C. acnes showed high resistance to benzylpenicillin (18%), clindamycin (39%), and imipenem (19% and 13% by MIC methods and disk diffusion, respectively). B. fragilis showed high resistance to amoxicillin/clavulanate (24%), piperacillin/tazobactam (22% and 14% by MIC methods and disk diffusion, respectively), clindamycin (22% by both MIC methods and disk diffusion), meropenem (13%), and metronidazole (10%, only by disk diffusion). A similar resistance pattern was observed in B. thetaiotaomicron, Bacteroides ovatus, and Parabacteroides distasonis. C. perfringens showed high resistance to clindamycin (69% and 45% by MIC methods and disk diffusion, respectively), while benzylpenicillin and metronidazole maintained over 90% activity. F. nucleatum showed high resistance to benzylpenicillin (11%), while Fusobacterium necrophorum showed alarming rates of resistance to clindamycin (12%), meropenem (16%) and metronidazole (11%). This study presented an up-to-date analysis of the diagnostics and epidemiology of anaerobic bacteria in Europe, providing insights for future comparative analyses and the development of antimicrobial diagnostic and management strategies, as well as the optimization of current antibiotic treatments.

From early 2020, a high demand for SARS-CoV-2 tests was driven by several testing indications, including asymptomatic cases, resulting in the massive roll-out of PCR assays to combat the pandemic. Considering the dynamic of viral shedding during the course of infection, the demand to report cycle threshold (Ct) values rapidly emerged. As Ct values can be affected by a number of factors, we considered that harmonization of semi-quantitative PCR results across laboratories would avoid potential divergent interpretations, particularly in the absence of clinical or serological information. A proposal to harmonize reporting of test results was drafted by the National Reference Centre (NRC) UZ/KU Leuven, distinguishing four categories of positivity based on RNA copies/mL. Pre-quantified control material was shipped to 124 laboratories with instructions to setup a standard curve to define thresholds per assay. For each assay, the mean Ct value and corresponding standard deviation was calculated per target gene, for the three concentrations (10⁷, 10⁵ and 10³ copies/mL) that determine the classification. The results of 17 assays are summarized. This harmonization effort allowed to ensure that all Belgian laboratories would report positive PCR results in the same semi-quantitative manner to clinicians and to the national database which feeds contact tracing interventions.

The use of saliva for the detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) sparks debate due to presumed lower sensitivity and lack of standardization. Our aim was to evaluate the performance characteristics of (i) saliva collected by the ORAcollect^TM device as a matrix for SARS-CoV-2 reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), and (ii) 2 saliva rapid antigen tests (AgRDT). From 342 ambulatory individuals, both a nasopharyngeal swab and saliva sample via ORAcollect^TM were obtained for a SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test. Furthermore, 54 and 123 additionally performed the V-Chek^TM or Whistling^TM saliva AgRDT. In total, 35% of individuals screened positive for SARS-CoV-2 via nasopharyngeal swab. Saliva, as a matrix for the RT-PCR, had a specificity of 96.5% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 91.3%. Interestingly, 6 out of 8 patients thought to be false positive in saliva re-tested positive by nasopharyngeal sampling after 2 to 9 days. Both V-Chek^TM and Whistling^TM AgRDT had a lack of sensitivity, resulting in an NPV of 66.9 and 67.3%, respectively. Saliva proved to be a sensitive and specific matrix for SARS-CoV-2 detection by the RT-PCR. In this setting, saliva might have an earlier window of detection than the nasopharyngeal swab. By contrast, both AgRDT showed an unacceptably low sensitivity and NPV.

Rhodococcus equi is a rare human opportunistic pathogen that has been increasingly reported in recent decades. It mainly affects immunosuppressed patients, and in particular human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)–infected patients, where it typically presents as cavitary pneumonia. Early treatment with combined and effective antimicrobials and antiretroviral therapy after prompt diagnosis is essential to ensure an optimal outcome. We present a case series of three human Rhodococcus equi infections in HIV‐infected patients with advanced immune suppression, treated at the University Hospital of Antwerp, Belgium.