Clinical Utility of the BioFire Meningitis/Encephalitis (ME) Panel in Diagnosing Central Nervous System Infections: A One-Year Prospective Study at GB Pant Hospital

Sheetal Goenka; Wanshisha Daphi Wanswett; Abha Sharma; Poonam Loomba; Manisha Jain; Shivani Tyagi

doi:10.18502/jmb.v13i4.20523

Sheetal Goenka Department of Microbiology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (GIPMER), India.
Wanshisha Daphi Wanswett Department of Microbiology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (GIPMER), India.
Abha Sharma Department of Microbiology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (GIPMER), India.
Poonam Loomba Department of Microbiology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (GIPMER), India.
Manisha Jain Department of Microbiology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (GIPMER), India.
Shivani Tyagi Department of Microbiology, Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (GIPMER), India.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/jmb.v13i4.20523

Keywords: BioFire ME Panel, Central nervous system infections, Encephalitis, Meningitis, Multiplex PCR

Abstract

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) infections are life-threatening medical emergenciesrequiring rapid and accurate diagnosis. This prospective study compared the BioFireMeningitis/Encephalitis (ME) Panel with conventional diagnostics in suspected cases.

Methods: We conducted a single-center, prospective study at GB Pant Hospital from January toDecember 2024, enrolling 100 consecutive patients with clinical suspicion of meningitis orencephalitis. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were simultaneously analysed using the BioFire MEPanel and conventional diagnostic methods (culture, Gram stain, cytology). Clinical data includingdemographics, risk factors, prior antimicrobial therapy, and outcomes were recorded.

Results: The BioFire ME Panel detected pathogens in 7% (7/100) of cases, comprising Streptococcuspneumoniae (n=2), Haemophilus influenzae (n=1), Escherichia coli K1 (n=1), herpes simplex virus(n=2), and cytomegalovirus (n=1). In two culture-negative cases with prior antibiotic exposure, thepanel successfully identified bacterial pathogens despite negative Gram stain results. The paneldemonstrated excellent diagnostic performance (sensitivity 100%, specificity 98.9%, PPV 87.5%,NPV 100%) with a median time-to-result of 65 minutes versus 72 hours for conventional cultures.Implementation of the panel led to therapy modifications in 71.4% (5/7) of positive cases, includingde-escalation of empiric therapy in 3 cases and targeted antiviral initiation in 2 cases.

Conclusion: The BioFire ME Panel demonstrates superior diagnostic utility in CNS infectiondiagnosis, particularly in culture-negative cases with prior antimicrobial exposure. Its rapidturnaround time facilitates prompt clinical decision-making and appropriate antimicrobialstewardship, suggesting significant value as a complementary diagnostic tool in the management ofsuspected meningitis and encephalitis