Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Department of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2023 Apr 20;61(4):e0171222. doi: 10.1128/jcm.01712-22. Epub 2023 Mar 13.
The Streptococcus bovis group (previously group D streptococci) consists of seven distinct species and subspecies. Definitive identification within the group is important, as certain organisms have been associated with gastrointestinal carcinoma, bacteremia, infective endocarditis, meningitis, biliary tract disease, and carcinoma, among others. Definitive identification, however, remains elusive due to limitations and inconsistencies across commonly used identification platforms in the United States. Here, we compared the performance of standard biochemical (Trek Gram-positive identification [GPID] plate, Vitek 2 GPID), sequencing (16S rDNA, ) databases (NCBI, RDP, CDC MicrobeNet), and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) platforms (Vitek MS, Bruker Biotyper MS) using a set of eight type strains representing all seven strains within the S. bovis group. Despite the evaluation of contemporary methods, no single platform was able to definitively identify all type strains within the S. bovis group. Vitek MS (85.7%, 7/8) provided the most accurate definitive identifications, followed by sequencing (75%, 6/8). Vitek 2 and Bruker Biotyper RUO platforms performed the next best (62.5%, 5/8). All remaining platforms failed to adequately differentiate type strains within the S. bovis group (range, 0 to 37.5%). Laboratorians and clinicians should be aware of the identification limitations of routine testing algorithms and incorporate reflex testing, when appropriate, to platforms such as Vitek MS and/or sequencing that are more able to definitively identify S. bovis group organisms. Further clinical evaluation was conducted using 65 clinical isolates from three geographically distinct U.S. institutions. Future improvements in identification platforms may reveal new clinical and epidemiological trends for members of the S. bovis group.
牛链球菌群(以前称为 D 群链球菌)由七个不同的种和亚种组成。在该群内进行明确鉴定很重要,因为某些生物体与胃肠道癌、菌血症、感染性心内膜炎、脑膜炎、胆道疾病和癌等有关。然而,由于美国常用的鉴定平台存在局限性和不一致性,明确鉴定仍然难以实现。在这里,我们比较了标准生化(Trek 革兰阳性鉴定[GPID]板、Vitek 2 GPID)、测序(16S rDNA, )数据库(NCBI、RDP、CDC MicrobeNet)和基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱( MALDI-TOF MS)平台(Vitek MS、Bruker Biotyper MS)的性能,使用一组 8 个代表牛链球菌群内所有 7 个菌株的模式菌株。尽管评估了当代方法,但没有一个平台能够明确鉴定牛链球菌群内的所有模式菌株。Vitek MS(85.7%,7/8)提供了最准确的明确鉴定,其次是测序(75%,6/8)。Vitek 2 和 Bruker Biotyper RUO 平台表现次之(62.5%,5/8)。所有其他平台都无法充分区分牛链球菌群内的模式菌株(范围为 0 至 37.5%)。实验室人员和临床医生应该意识到常规测试算法的鉴定局限性,并在适当的情况下将测试平台如 Vitek MS 和/或测序纳入其中,这些平台更能够明确鉴定牛链球菌群的生物体。在来自美国三个地理位置不同的机构的 65 个临床分离株中进行了进一步的临床评估。鉴定平台的未来改进可能会揭示牛链球菌群成员的新临床和流行病学趋势。