Centre Hospitalier du Bassin de Thau, Laboratoire de Biologie, Sète, France.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010 May;67(1):9-14. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2009.12.012. Epub 2010 Feb 18.
We compared the accuracy of 6 commercial systems for Aeromonas identification by testing 87 clinical isolates in routine conditions, using partial rpoB gene sequencing as the reference standard. The systems were API-20E, API-32GN, the ID-GN card with the Vitek2 system (bioMérieux, Marcy l'Etoile, France), the identification portion of the NFC47 panel (MicroScan Walk/Away system; Siemens Healthcare, Sacramento, CA), ID69 (Phoenix system; BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, MD), and GN2 microplates (Omnilog system; Biolog, Hayward, CA), for which 67 (77.1%), 80 (91.9%), 72 (82.7%), 70 (80.5%), 64 (73.5%), and 59 (67.8%) isolates, respectively, were correctly identified at the genus and species level. Confusion with Vibrio affected 6.9% and 16.1% of results obtained with NFC47 and API-20E, respectively. Overall, the accuracy of identification for aeromonads was hampered by outdated databases and taxonomy, weak algorithms, and impractical additional tests. Commercial identification systems should be redesigned to make Aeromonas identification algorithms more robust and to cover infrequent clinical species of this genus.
我们比较了 6 种商业系统在常规条件下对气单胞菌鉴定的准确性，使用部分 rpoB 基因测序作为参考标准，共检测了 87 株临床分离株。这些系统分别是 API-20E、API-32GN、Vitek2 系统的 ID-GN 卡（法国马西·勒·埃托勒的生物梅里埃公司）、NFC47 试剂盒（西门子医疗，加利福尼亚州萨克拉门托）中的鉴定部分、ID69（凤凰城系统；马里兰州斯帕克斯的 BD 诊断系统）和 GN2 微孔板（奥米洛格系统；加利福尼亚州海沃德的生物逻辑公司），分别有 67（77.1%）、80（91.9%）、72（82.7%）、70（80.5%）、64（73.5%）和 59（67.8%）株分离株在属和种水平上得到正确鉴定。与 NFC47 和 API-20E 分别获得的结果混淆的有 6.9%和 16.1%的是弧菌。总的来说，气单胞菌鉴定的准确性受到过时的数据库和分类学、薄弱的算法以及不切实际的附加测试的影响。商业鉴定系统应该重新设计，以使气单胞菌鉴定算法更加健壮，并涵盖该属不常见的临床菌种。
