Peterson E M, Shigei J T, Woolard A, de la Maza L M
Department of Pathology, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange 92668.
Am J Clin Pathol. 1988 Jul;90(1):87-91. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/90.1.87.
The API 20S (Analytab Products, Plainview, NY), the GPI card (Vitek Systems, St. Louis, MO) and the RapSTR system (Innovative Diagnostics, Atlanta, GA) were compared with conventional biochemicals for the identification of viridans streptococci. One hundred nine clinical isolates were tested that included the following species: intermedius (38) sanguis II (20), bovis (variant) (14), mitis (14), salivarius (11), sanguis I (6), constellatus (3), mutans (2), and uberis (1). With initial testing, a correct species call was made with 72% of the isolates with the GPI card, 62% with the RapSTR, and 50% with the API 20S. Identifications of viridans streptococci group or those that needed additional biochemicals for species identification occurred with 28% of isolates with the API 20S, 8% with the RapSTR, and 9% with the GPI card. Incorrect identifications occurred with 6% of the isolates tested by the GPI card, 20% with the API 20S, and 30% with the RapSTR. Most discrepancies with the RapSTR were with 66% of the intermedius isolates, whereas most, 55%, of misidentifications with the API 20S were with sanguis II isolates. No identifications were made with 2% and 13% of isolates with the API 20S and GPI, respectively.
将API 20S(Analytab Products公司,纽约州普莱恩维尤)、GPI卡(Vitek Systems公司,密苏里州圣路易斯)和RapSTR系统(Innovative Diagnostics公司,佐治亚州亚特兰大)与传统生化方法进行比较,以鉴定草绿色链球菌。对109株临床分离株进行了检测,这些分离株包括以下菌种:中间型(38株)、血链球菌II型(20株)、牛链球菌(变异型)(14株)、轻型(14株)、唾液链球菌(11株)、血链球菌I型(6株)、星座链球菌(3株)、变形链球菌(2株)和乳房链球菌(1株)。初次检测时,GPI卡对72%的分离株做出了正确的菌种鉴定,RapSTR为62%,API 20S为50%。API 20S对28%的分离株鉴定为草绿色链球菌属或需要额外生化方法进行菌种鉴定,RapSTR为8%,GPI卡为9%。GPI卡检测的分离株中有6%出现错误鉴定,API 20S为20%,RapSTR为30%。RapSTR的大多数差异(66%)出现在中间型分离株中,而API 20S的大多数错误鉴定(55%)出现在血链球菌II型分离株中。API 20S和GPI分别有2%和13%的分离株未做出鉴定。