Renneberg J, Rieneck K, Gutschik E
Department of Clinical Microbiology, Bispebjerg Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
J Clin Microbiol. 1995 May;33(5):1150-3. doi: 10.1128/jcm.33.5.1150-1153.1995.
The purpose of the investigation was to evaluate two commercially available identification systems: a new modification of the Staph-Zym system (Rosco, Tåstrup, Denmark) and the Staph ID 32 API system (API System, BioMérieux, Paris, France). A local standard method to be used in routine laboratories was also evaluated. A total of 200 staphylococcal isolates, including strains from both the American Type Culture Collection and the Czechoslovak Collection of Microorganisms as well as 89 clinical isolates, were used in tests of all three identification systems. The Staph ID 32 API system identified from 50 to 100% of the reference strains and 82.1% of the clinical isolates correctly. The Staph-Zym system identified from 90 to 100% of the reference strains and 82.1% of the clinical isolates correctly. Most misidentifications were of minor importance, but in both systems major failures appeared (Staphylococcus aureus was identified as a coagulase-negative staphylococcus). Both systems needed backup from a reference laboratory to determine if two isolates were of the same strain.
葡萄球菌酶系统(Rosco,丹麦塔斯特鲁普)的一种新改良版和葡萄球菌ID 32 API系统(API系统,法国生物梅里埃公司,巴黎)。还评估了一种将在常规实验室使用的本地标准方法。在所有三种鉴定系统的测试中,共使用了200株葡萄球菌分离株,包括来自美国模式培养物集存库和捷克斯洛伐克微生物集存库的菌株以及89株临床分离株。葡萄球菌ID 32 API系统正确鉴定了50%至100%的参考菌株和82.1%的临床分离株。葡萄球菌酶系统正确鉴定了90%至100%的参考菌株和82.1%的临床分离株。大多数错误鉴定的影响较小,但在这两种系统中都出现了重大失误(金黄色葡萄球菌被鉴定为凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌)。两种系统都需要参考实验室的支持来确定两个分离株是否属于同一菌株。