2349. C. diff-erent results: Eliminating Inappropriate Stool PCR Tests Through an Interdisciplinary Infection Prevention and Mirobiology Collaboration

Background Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is based on symptoms and laboratory results. Distinguishing between CDI vs colonization or antibiotic-associated diarrhea is challenging. Widespread adoption of a highly sensitive real-time nucleic-acid amplification assay for toxin B DNA (Xpert CD assay, Cepheid) by US hospital-based microbiology labs has increased the challenge, resulting in overreporting of healthcare facility-onset CDI. Excess testing is inevitable in hospitals with EPIC electronic medical record (EMR) that incorporate best practice alerts (BPAs) prompting for C. difficile testing (CDT) when loose stools are charted by nursing staff. Methods Beginning October 1, 2018 microbiology and infection prevention (IP) staff at our 650 bed teaching hospital in central IL agreed to partner on a diagnostic stewardship effort to engage providers on potentially unnecessary or inappropriate CDTs. All stool samples sent to lab for CDT are held pending IP review. The IP review tool provides a guide for EMR review of contributing factors in diarrhea, including patient history, medications (e.g., laxatives, stool softeners), nutrition (e.g., tube feeds), symptoms (abdominal pain), and labs (e.g., serum creatinine, WBC count). Inappropriate CDT was defined as test of patients receiving pro-motility treatment, without signs of infection. Results Between October 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018, 383 CDT were ordered on inpatients. 196 were requested within 3 days of admission, and 187 were requested on beyond day 4. 56.6% (107/187) HO-CDTs were deemed inappropriate and canceled; 80 HO-CDT were deemed appropriate. 18.8% (15/80) of HO-CDTs were positive. Compared with October 1 - December 31, 2017, HO-CDI cases decreased by 66.7% (1.0 - 15/45) over the same period in 2018. Conclusion A 66.7% reduction in HO-CDI (vs. FY2017 cases) was seen in the first 3 months following adoption of a team-based (IPs, microbiology lab staff and MD director), CDT diagnostic stewardship intervention employing EMR review and patient provider engagement (RNs and MDs). Opportunities identified during the first 90 days of CDT stewardship: (a) Lack of provider awareness of pro-motility therapies; (b)inappropriate prompting for CDT generated by the EPIC EMR. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Intra-operative assessment of sentinel lymph node status by one-step nucleic acid amplification assay (OSNA) in early endometrial cancer: a prospective study

BackgroundSentinel node mapping has been proposed to reduce surgical side effects, maintaining the accuracy in nodal status assessment for endometrial cancer.ObjectiveTo investigate the role of one-step nucleic acid amplification assay (OSNA) analysis, in the intra-operative tailoring of full nodal dissection, and to analyze the correlation between the type of sentinel node metastasis and the risk of non-sentinel node metastasis.MethodsSurgical and pathological data were collected from 141 consecutive, clinical stage I patients with endometrial cancer undergoing surgical staging. Patients were excluded if they had previous pelvic or abdominal radiotherapy, chemotherapy, abdominal cancer, pelvic or abdominal lymphadenectomy, or contraindications to indocyanine green. All sentinel nodes were analyzed by OSNA, and full lymphadenectomy was performed in positive cases. Statistical analysis was performed using Χ2 and Fisher's exact test to determine whether any of these characteristics could accurately predict the non-sentinel nodes status in positive sentinel node patients.ResultsA total of 141 patients were included in the analysis. Bilateral sentinel nodes were identified in 104 (73.8%) patients, with a median number of 2 (range 2–6) sentinel nodes per patient. In the remaining 37 patients (26.2%), a unilateral sentinel node was obtained, with a median of 1 (range 1–3) sentinel node per patient. Thirty-three (12.0%) positive nodes were found in 24 (17.0%) patients: micro-metastases and macro-metastases were detected in 22 and 2 patients, respectively. At final pathology, all patients with positive non-sentinel nodes had macro-metastases in the sentinel node, whereas in micro-metastatic sentinel nodes no other positive nodes were found at full lymphadenectomy (p<0.001).ConclusionsOur results showed a correlation between the type of metastasis in the sentinel lymph node (SLN) and the incidence of positive non-SLNs. These data suggest a potential role of OSNA analysis in the surgical tailoring of patients with early endometrial cancer, with the goal of definitive risk stratification and a better individualization of adjuvant therapy.