Suppr超能文献

对生物梅里埃VITEK MS和布鲁克Microflex MS这两种基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱系统进行实时比较评估,以鉴定具有临床意义的细菌。

Real-time comparative evaluation of bioMerieux VITEK MS versus Bruker Microflex MS, two matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry systems, for identification of clinically significant bacteria.

作者信息

Jamal Wafaa, Albert M John, Rotimi Vincent O

出版信息

BMC Microbiol. 2014 Nov 30;14:289. doi: 10.1186/s12866-014-0289-0.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) recently became available for the identification of bacteria in routine diagnostic laboratories. It is rapid and cost-effective and likely to replace phenotypic identification. This study was undertaken to compare two MALDI-TOF MS-based, Bruker Microflex MS (BMS) and VITEK MS (VMS) systems, for identification (ID) of clinically significant bacterial isolates. Clinically relevant broad diversity of bacterial isolates obtained during a 6-consecutive months of routine laboratory processing of clinical specimens were subjected to ID by the BMS and VMS in parallel with Vitek 2, a conventional phenotypic system (CPS). For the BMS, the isolates were tested in duplicates directly and after pretreatment. Identification was provided with accompanying scores according to manufacturers' instructions. With VMS, single deposits of the same sets of isolates were tested in duplicates directly on MALDI-plate. Results were interpreted according to the manufacturer's protocols. Discrepant results were resolved by 16S rRNA gene amplification and sequencing.

RESULTS

A total of 806 pathogens comprising 507 Gram-negative bacilli (GNB), 16 Gram-negative cocci (GNC), 267 Gram-positive cocci (GPC), and 16 Gram-positive bacilli (GPB) were tested. BMS and VMS correctly identified isolates to genus and species levels (ID 97.3% and 93.2%, and 99.8% and 99.0%, respectively). Both systems as well as the CPS correctly identified the majority of the species in the family Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas spp., and Acinetobacter baumannii. Turnaround time for identification by BMS and VMS was <20 min compared with 24-48 h by the CPS.

CONCLUSIONS

VMS performed slightly better than BMS with GPC ID, especially the Streptococcus spp. Some S. mitis isolates were identified as S. pneumoniae by BMS. BMS and VMS were rapid and proved to be consistently accurate for producing bacterial identification in a fraction of time it takes for identification by CPS.

摘要

背景

基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF MS)最近已可用于常规诊断实验室中的细菌鉴定。它快速且经济高效,很可能会取代表型鉴定。本研究旨在比较两种基于MALDI-TOF MS的系统,布鲁克微flex质谱仪(BMS)和VITEK质谱仪(VMS),用于鉴定具有临床意义的细菌分离株。在连续6个月对临床标本进行常规实验室处理过程中获得的具有临床相关性的多种细菌分离株,同时采用BMS和VMS以及传统表型系统Vitek 2(CPS)进行鉴定。对于BMS,分离株直接和预处理后均进行一式两份测试。根据制造商说明提供鉴定结果及相应分数。对于VMS,相同分离株的单份样本直接在MALDI板上进行一式两份测试。结果根据制造商方案进行解读。结果不一致的情况通过16S rRNA基因扩增和测序解决。

结果

共测试了806株病原体,包括507株革兰氏阴性杆菌(GNB)、16株革兰氏阴性球菌(GNC)、267株革兰氏阳性球菌(GPC)和16株革兰氏阳性杆菌(GPB)。BMS和VMS分别将分离株正确鉴定到属和种水平(分别为97.3%和93.2%,以及99.8%和99.0%)。两种系统以及CPS均正确鉴定了肠杆菌科、假单胞菌属和鲍曼不动杆菌中的大多数菌种。BMS和VMS的鉴定周转时间<20分钟,而CPS为24 - 48小时。

结论

在革兰氏阳性球菌鉴定方面,VMS的表现略优于BMS,尤其是链球菌属。一些缓症链球菌分离株被BMS鉴定为肺炎链球菌。BMS和VMS速度快,且在CPS鉴定所需时间的一小部分内就能始终准确地进行细菌鉴定。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

8
Updated Review on Species: 2006-2021.物种更新综述:2006-2021 年。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2022 Dec 21;35(4):e0002721. doi: 10.1128/cmr.00027-21. Epub 2022 Oct 31.
9
in foods-From culture identification to whole-genome characteristics.食品中的——从培养物鉴定到全基因组特征。
Food Sci Nutr. 2022 May 3;10(9):2825-2854. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.2910. eCollection 2022 Sep.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验