Cargando…

Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF

BACKGROUND: 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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tanner, Hannah, Evans, Jason T., Gossain, Savita, Hussain, Abid
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5241956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28100271
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-2366-y
_version_ 1782496269570146304
author Tanner, Hannah
Evans, Jason T.
Gossain, Savita
Hussain, Abid
author_facet Tanner, Hannah
Evans, Jason T.
Gossain, Savita
Hussain, Abid
author_sort Tanner, Hannah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: 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. 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5241956
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52419562017-01-23 Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF Tanner, Hannah Evans, Jason T. Gossain, Savita Hussain, Abid BMC Res Notes Research Article BACKGROUND: 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. 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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. BioMed Central 2017-01-18 /pmc/articles/PMC5241956/ /pubmed/28100271 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-2366-y Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Tanner, Hannah
Evans, Jason T.
Gossain, Savita
Hussain, Abid
Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF
title Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF
title_full Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF
title_fullStr Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF
title_short Evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF
title_sort evaluation of three sample preparation methods for the direct identification of bacteria in positive blood cultures by maldi-tof
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5241956/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28100271
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13104-016-2366-y
work_keys_str_mv AT tannerhannah evaluationofthreesamplepreparationmethodsforthedirectidentificationofbacteriainpositivebloodculturesbymalditof
AT evansjasont evaluationofthreesamplepreparationmethodsforthedirectidentificationofbacteriainpositivebloodculturesbymalditof
AT gossainsavita evaluationofthreesamplepreparationmethodsforthedirectidentificationofbacteriainpositivebloodculturesbymalditof
AT hussainabid evaluationofthreesamplepreparationmethodsforthedirectidentificationofbacteriainpositivebloodculturesbymalditof