Shakespeare A P, Megson G M, Jones P A, Drucker D B, Keaney M G, Ganguli L A
Department of Microbiology, Hope Hospital, University of Manchester Medical School, Salford.
J Clin Pathol. 1992 Feb;45(2):168-70. doi: 10.1136/jcp.45.2.168.
To assess the accuracy of the Mast-ID 15 system compared with API 20 E for the identification of stock and fresh clinical strains of Enterobacteriaceae and Acinetobacter spp; to compare the accuracy of 19 pin and 36 pin multipoint inoculator heads.
One hundred frozen stock cultures of Enterobacteriaceae and Acinetobacter spp which had previously been identified by the API 20E were classified by the Mast-ID using 19 and 36 pin multipoint inoculator heads. Reproducibility was determined by testing 36 randomly selected organisms in duplicate. Four hundred and sixty nine consecutive fresh clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae and Acinetobacter spp were identified by the Mast-ID using a 36 pin multipoint inoculator and by the API 20E. Reproducibility for the fresh isolates was determined by testing 96 randomly selected strains in duplicate.
The Mast-ID 15 identified 82% and 85% of frozen strains to species level and reproducibility was 80% and 86% using 19 and 36 pin inoculator heads, respectively. Of the 469 fresh clinical isolates, the Mast-ID identified 70% of strains to species level; 19% were not identified and 11% were identified incorrectly by comparison with the API 20E. The Mast-ID achieved a reproducibility level of 80% with the fresh clinical isolates.
The use of a 36 pin multipoint inoculator head in preference to the standard 19 pin head for the Mast-ID was advantageous as it allowed greater numbers of strains to be identified at a reduced cost. Unfortunately, in our hands, the Mast-ID system was insufficiently accurate for routine use in the clinical laboratory. Modifications to some of the problematic tests may result in a sufficient increase in accuracy and reproducibility to make the system beneficial in the routine clinical laboratory.
评估Mast-ID 15系统与API 20 E相比,用于鉴定肠杆菌科和不动杆菌属的储备菌株及新鲜临床菌株的准确性;比较19针和36针多点接种针头的准确性。
使用19针和36针多点接种针头,通过Mast-ID对100株先前已由API 20E鉴定的肠杆菌科和不动杆菌属冷冻储备培养物进行分类。通过对36株随机选择的菌株进行重复测试来确定再现性。使用36针多点接种器通过Mast-ID和API 20E对469株连续的肠杆菌科和不动杆菌属新鲜临床分离株进行鉴定。通过对96株随机选择的菌株进行重复测试来确定新鲜分离株的再现性。
Mast-ID 15将82%和85%的冷冻菌株鉴定到种水平,使用19针和36针接种针头时的再现性分别为80%和86%。在469株新鲜临床分离株中,Mast-ID将70%的菌株鉴定到种水平;与API 20E相比,19%未被鉴定,11%被错误鉴定。Mast-ID对新鲜临床分离株的再现性水平为80%。
对于Mast-ID,优先使用36针多点接种针头而非标准的19针针头是有利的,因为它能够以更低的成本鉴定更多的菌株。不幸的是,在我们的研究中,Mast-ID系统在临床实验室的常规使用中准确性不足。对一些有问题的测试进行修改可能会使准确性和再现性有足够的提高,从而使该系统在常规临床实验室中发挥作用。