Tanner Hannah, Evans Jason T, Gossain Savita, Hussain Abid
Public Health England, Public Health Laboratory Birmingham, Heartlands Hospital, Bordesley Green East, Birmingham, B9 5SS, UK.
Wales Centre for Mycobacteria, Public Health Wales, University Hospital Llandough, Penarth, CF64 2XX, UK.
BMC Res Notes. 2017 Jan 18;10(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s13104-016-2366-y.
Patient mortality is significantly reduced by rapid identification of bacteria from sterile sites. MALDI-TOF can identify bacteria directly from positive blood cultures and multiple sample preparation methods are available. We evaluated three sample preparation methods and two MALDI-TOF score cut-off values. Positive blood culture bottles with organisms present in Gram stains were prospectively analysed by MALDI-TOF. Three lysis reagents (Saponin, SDS, and SepsiTyper lysis bufer) were applied to each positive culture followed by centrifugation, washing and protein extraction steps. Methods were compared using the McNemar test and 16S rDNA sequencing was used to assess discordant results.
In 144 monomicrobial cultures, using ≥2.000 as the cut-off value, species level identifications were obtained from 69/144 (48%) samples using Saponin, 86/144 (60%) using SDS, and 91/144 (63%) using SepsiTyper. The difference between SDS and SepsiTyper was not statistically significant (P = 0.228). Differences between Saponin and the other two reagents were significant (P < 0.01). Using ≥1.700 plus top three results matching as the cut-off value, species level identifications were obtained from 100/144 (69%) samples using Saponin, 103/144 (72%) using SDS, and 106/144 (74%) using SepsiTyper and there was no statistical difference between the methods. No true discordances between culture and direct MALDI-TOF identification were observed in monomicrobial cultures. In 32 polymicrobial cultures, MALDI-TOF identified one organism in 34-75% of samples depending on the method.
This study demonstrates two inexpensive in-house detergent lysis methods are non-inferior to a commercial kit for analysis of positive blood cultures by direct MALDI-TOF in a clinical diagnostic microbiology laboratory.
通过快速从无菌部位鉴定细菌可显著降低患者死亡率。基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF)可直接从阳性血培养物中鉴定细菌,且有多种样本制备方法可供选择。我们评估了三种样本制备方法和两个MALDI-TOF评分临界值。对革兰氏染色显示有微生物的阳性血培养瓶进行MALDI-TOF前瞻性分析。将三种裂解试剂(皂苷、十二烷基硫酸钠和SepsiTyper裂解缓冲液)分别应用于每个阳性培养物,随后进行离心、洗涤和蛋白质提取步骤。使用McNemar检验比较方法,并使用16S核糖体DNA测序评估不一致的结果。
在144份单一微生物培养物中,以≥2.000作为临界值,使用皂苷法从69/144(48%)的样本中获得了种水平鉴定结果,使用十二烷基硫酸钠法从86/144(60%)的样本中获得了种水平鉴定结果,使用SepsiTyper法从91/144(63%)的样本中获得了种水平鉴定结果。十二烷基硫酸钠法和SepsiTyper法之间的差异无统计学意义(P = 0.228)。皂苷法与其他两种试剂之间的差异有统计学意义(P < 0.01)。以≥1.700加上排名前三的匹配结果作为临界值,使用皂苷法从100/144(69%)的样本中获得了种水平鉴定结果,使用十二烷基硫酸钠法从103/144(72%)的样本中获得了种水平鉴定结果,使用SepsiTyper法从106/144(74%)的样本中获得了种水平鉴定结果,且各方法之间无统计学差异。在单一微生物培养物中,未观察到培养结果与直接MALDI-TOF鉴定结果之间存在真正的不一致。在32份混合微生物培养物中,根据方法不同,MALDI-TOF在34% - 75%的样本中鉴定出一种微生物。
本研究表明,在临床诊断微生物实验室中,两种廉价的自制去污剂裂解方法在通过直接MALDI-TOF分析阳性血培养物方面并不逊色于商业试剂盒。