Verweij P E, Breuker I M, Rijs A J, Meis J F
Department of Medical Microbiology, University Hospital Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
J Clin Pathol. 1999 Apr;52(4):271-3. doi: 10.1136/jcp.52.4.271.
To compare the performance of seven commercial yeast identification methods with that of a reference method, and to compare the costs of the commercial kits.
Clinical yeast isolates (n = 52), comprising 19 species, were identified using Vitek, Api ID 32C, Api 20C AUX, Yeast Star, Auxacolor, RapID Yeast Plus system, and Api Candida and compared with a reference method which employed conventional tests.
The percentage of correctly identified isolates varied between 59.6% and 80.8%. Overall, the highest performance was obtained with Api Candida (78.8%) and Auxacolor (80.8%). Among germ tube negative yeast isolates, Auxacolor and Api Candida both identified 93.1% of isolates correctly. All systems failed to identify C norvegensis, C catenulata, C haemulonii, and C dubliniensis. In comparison with Auxacolor, the Api Candida is less expensive and requires less bench time.
Auxacolor and Api Candida appeared to be the most useful systems for identification of germ tube negative yeast isolates in clinical microbiology laboratories, although one should be aware that several germ tube negative Candida species cannot be identified by these systems.
比较七种商业酵母鉴定方法与一种参考方法的性能，并比较商业试剂盒的成本。
使用Vitek、Api ID 32C、Api 20C AUX、Yeast Star、Auxacolor、RapID Yeast Plus系统和Api Candida对包含19个菌种的52株临床酵母分离株进行鉴定，并与采用传统试验的参考方法进行比较。
正确鉴定的分离株百分比在59.6%至80.8%之间。总体而言，Api Candida（78.8%）和Auxacolor（80.8%）的性能最高。在芽管阴性酵母分离株中，Auxacolor和Api Candida均正确鉴定了93.1%的分离株。所有系统均未能鉴定出挪威念珠菌、链状念珠菌、哈氏念珠菌和都柏林念珠菌。与Auxacolor相比，Api Candida成本更低，所需实验台操作时间更少。
Auxacolor和Api Candida似乎是临床微生物实验室鉴定芽管阴性酵母分离株最有用的系统，不过应注意这些系统无法鉴定几种芽管阴性念珠菌种。
