Cargando…

Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates

BACKGROUND: Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) allows rapid and accurate identification of clinical yeast isolates. In-tube formic acid/acetonitrile (FA/ACN) extraction is recommended prior to the analysis with MALDI Biotyper, but the direct o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Hyun-Seung, Shin, Jong Hee, Choi, Min Ji, Won, Eun Jeong, Kee, Seung Jung, Kim, Soo Hyun, Shin, Myung-Geun, Suh, Soon-Pal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5339094/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28224768
http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2017.37.3.223
_version_ 1782512609911635968
author Lee, Hyun-Seung
Shin, Jong Hee
Choi, Min Ji
Won, Eun Jeong
Kee, Seung Jung
Kim, Soo Hyun
Shin, Myung-Geun
Suh, Soon-Pal
author_facet Lee, Hyun-Seung
Shin, Jong Hee
Choi, Min Ji
Won, Eun Jeong
Kee, Seung Jung
Kim, Soo Hyun
Shin, Myung-Geun
Suh, Soon-Pal
author_sort Lee, Hyun-Seung
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) allows rapid and accurate identification of clinical yeast isolates. In-tube formic acid/acetonitrile (FA/ACN) extraction is recommended prior to the analysis with MALDI Biotyper, but the direct on-plate FA extraction is simpler. We compared the Biotyper with the VITEK MS for the identification of various clinically relevant yeast species, focusing on the use of the FA extraction method. METHODS: We analyzed 309 clinical isolates of 42 yeast species (four common Candida species, Cryptococcus neoformans, and 37 uncommon yeast species) using the Biotyper and VITEK MS systems. FA extraction was used initially for all isolates. If ‘no identification' result was obtained following the initial FA extraction, these samples were then retested by using FA (both systems, additive FA) or FA/ACN (Biotyper only, additive FA/ACN) extraction. These results were compared with those obtained by sequence-based identification. RESULTS: Both systems correctly identified all 158 isolates of the four common Candida species after the initial FA extraction. The Biotyper correctly identified 8.7%, 30.4%, and 100% of 23 C. neoformans isolates after performing initial FA, additive FA, and FA/ACN extractions, respectively, while VITEK MS identified all C. neoformans isolates after the initial FA extraction. Both systems had comparable identification rates of 37 uncommon yeast species (128 isolates), following the initial FA (Biotyper, 74.2%; VITEK MS, 73.4%) or additive FA (Biotyper, 82.0%; VITEK MS, 73.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The identification rate of most common and uncommon yeast isolates is comparable between simple FA extraction/Biotyper method and VITEK MS methods, but FA/ACN extraction is necessary for C. neoformans identification by Biotyper.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5339094
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53390942017-05-01 Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates Lee, Hyun-Seung Shin, Jong Hee Choi, Min Ji Won, Eun Jeong Kee, Seung Jung Kim, Soo Hyun Shin, Myung-Geun Suh, Soon-Pal Ann Lab Med Original Article BACKGROUND: Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) allows rapid and accurate identification of clinical yeast isolates. In-tube formic acid/acetonitrile (FA/ACN) extraction is recommended prior to the analysis with MALDI Biotyper, but the direct on-plate FA extraction is simpler. We compared the Biotyper with the VITEK MS for the identification of various clinically relevant yeast species, focusing on the use of the FA extraction method. METHODS: We analyzed 309 clinical isolates of 42 yeast species (four common Candida species, Cryptococcus neoformans, and 37 uncommon yeast species) using the Biotyper and VITEK MS systems. FA extraction was used initially for all isolates. If ‘no identification' result was obtained following the initial FA extraction, these samples were then retested by using FA (both systems, additive FA) or FA/ACN (Biotyper only, additive FA/ACN) extraction. These results were compared with those obtained by sequence-based identification. RESULTS: Both systems correctly identified all 158 isolates of the four common Candida species after the initial FA extraction. The Biotyper correctly identified 8.7%, 30.4%, and 100% of 23 C. neoformans isolates after performing initial FA, additive FA, and FA/ACN extractions, respectively, while VITEK MS identified all C. neoformans isolates after the initial FA extraction. Both systems had comparable identification rates of 37 uncommon yeast species (128 isolates), following the initial FA (Biotyper, 74.2%; VITEK MS, 73.4%) or additive FA (Biotyper, 82.0%; VITEK MS, 73.4%). CONCLUSIONS: The identification rate of most common and uncommon yeast isolates is comparable between simple FA extraction/Biotyper method and VITEK MS methods, but FA/ACN extraction is necessary for C. neoformans identification by Biotyper. The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 2017-05 2017-02-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5339094/ /pubmed/28224768 http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2017.37.3.223 Text en © The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Lee, Hyun-Seung
Shin, Jong Hee
Choi, Min Ji
Won, Eun Jeong
Kee, Seung Jung
Kim, Soo Hyun
Shin, Myung-Geun
Suh, Soon-Pal
Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates
title Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates
title_full Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates
title_fullStr Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates
title_short Comparison of the Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry Systems Using a Formic Acid Extraction Method to Identify Common and Uncommon Yeast Isolates
title_sort comparison of the bruker biotyper and vitek ms matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry systems using a formic acid extraction method to identify common and uncommon yeast isolates
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5339094/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28224768
http://dx.doi.org/10.3343/alm.2017.37.3.223
work_keys_str_mv AT leehyunseung comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates
AT shinjonghee comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates
AT choiminji comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates
AT woneunjeong comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates
AT keeseungjung comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates
AT kimsoohyun comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates
AT shinmyunggeun comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates
AT suhsoonpal comparisonofthebrukerbiotyperandvitekmsmatrixassistedlaserdesorptionionizationtimeofflightmassspectrometrysystemsusingaformicacidextractionmethodtoidentifycommonanduncommonyeastisolates