Almuhayawi Mohammed, Altun Osman, Abdulmajeed Adam Dilshad, Ullberg Måns, Özenci Volkan
Division of Clinical Microbiology F 72, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Huddinge, SE 141 86, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Microbiology, King Abdul-Aziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.
PLoS One. 2015 Nov 10;10(11):e0142398. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142398. eCollection 2015.
Detection and identification of anaerobic bacteria in blood cultures (BC) is a well-recognized challenge in clinical microbiology. We studied 100 clinical anaerobic BC isolates to evaluate the performance of BacT/ALERT-FN, -FN Plus (BioMérieux), BACTEC-Plus and -Lytic (Becton Dickinson BioSciences) BC bottles in detection and time to detection (TTD) of anaerobic bacteria. BACTEC Lytic had higher detection rate (94/100, 94%) than BacT/ALERT FN Plus (80/100, 80%) (p<0.01) in the studied material. There was no significant difference in detection of anaerobic bacteria among the remaining bottle types. The 67 anaerobic bacteria that signalled positive in all four bottle types were analyzed to compare the time to detection (TTD) and isolates were directly identified by MALDI-TOF MS. There was a significant difference in TTD among the four bottle types (p<0.0001). The shortest median TTD was 18 h in BACTEC Lytic followed by BacT/ALERT FN (23.5 h), BACTEC Plus (27 h) and finally BacT/ALERT FN Plus (38 h) bottles. In contrast, MALDI-TOF MS performed similarly in all bottle types with accurate identification in 51/67 (76%) BacT/ALERT FN, 51/67 (76%) BacT/ALERT FN Plus, 53/67 (79%) BACTEC Plus and 50/67 (75%) BACTEC Lytic bottles. In conclusion, BACTEC Lytic bottles have significantly better detection rates and shorter TTD compared to the three other bottle types. The anaerobic BC bottles are equally suitable for direct MALDI-TOF MS for rapid and reliable identification of common anaerobic bacteria. Further clinical studies are warranted to investigate the performance of anaerobic BC bottles in detection of anaerobic bacteria and identification by direct MALDI-TOF MS.
在临床微生物学中,血培养(BC)中厌氧菌的检测和鉴定是一项公认的挑战。我们研究了100株临床厌氧血培养分离株,以评估BacT/ALERT - FN、- FN Plus(生物梅里埃公司)、BACTEC - Plus和 - Lytic(贝克顿·迪金森生物科学公司)血培养瓶在厌氧菌检测及检测时间(TTD)方面的性能。在所研究的样本中,BACTEC Lytic的检测率(94/100,94%)高于BacT/ALERT FN Plus(80/100,80%)(p<0.01)。其余血培养瓶类型在厌氧菌检测方面无显著差异。对在所有四种血培养瓶类型中均呈阳性信号的67株厌氧菌进行分析,以比较检测时间(TTD),并通过基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI - TOF MS)直接鉴定分离株。四种血培养瓶类型的TTD存在显著差异(p<0.0001)。BACTEC Lytic的最短中位TTD为18小时,其次是BacT/ALERT FN(23.5小时)、BACTEC Plus(27小时),最后是BacT/ALERT FN Plus(38小时)血培养瓶。相比之下,MALDI - TOF MS在所有血培养瓶类型中的表现相似,在51/67(76%)的BacT/ALERT FN血培养瓶、51/67(76%)的BacT/ALERT FN Plus血培养瓶、53/67(79%)的BACTEC Plus血培养瓶和50/67(75%)的BACTEC Lytic血培养瓶中能准确鉴定。总之,与其他三种血培养瓶类型相比,BACTEC Lytic血培养瓶具有显著更高的检测率和更短的TTD。厌氧血培养瓶同样适用于通过直接MALDI - TOF MS快速可靠地鉴定常见厌氧菌。有必要开展进一步的临床研究,以调查厌氧血培养瓶在厌氧菌检测及通过直接MALDI - TOF MS进行鉴定方面的性能。