Species identification of Enterococcus spp: Whole genome sequencing compared to three biochemical test‐based systems and two Matrix‐Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time‐of‐Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI‐TOF MS) systems

AIM: Here, we evaluated the performance of two commercial MALDI‐TOF MS systems and three biochemical‐based systems and compared them to WGS as the gold standard for identifying isolates of vancomycin‐resistant enterococci (VRE). METHODS: A total of 87 VRE clinical isolates were included. The mass spectrometers were the Microflex system with Biotyper software 3.1 and the Vitek MS system. The biochemical‐based systems included the Vitek 2, Phoenix, and MicroScan WalkAway systems. WGS was performed on an Illumina MiSeq instrument using the MiSeq v3 reagent kit. Vancomycin resistance was determined according to CLSI criteria. RESULTS: Among the 87 VRE, 71 and 16 were identified as Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis by WGS. All 71 E faecium were correctly identified by both mass spectrometers, as well as the Vitek 2 and Phoenix instruments. However, only 51 E faecium isolates were correctly identified by the MicroScan system. The most frequent misidentification was Enterococcus casseliflavus (n = 20). For vancomycin‐resistant E faecium, the Microflex Biotyper system had the highest sensitivity (85.54%), and all instruments (except for the Microscan) had a 100% specificity and PPV. Up to 87% of E faecalis isolates were misidentified by VITEK MS and VITEK2, 81% by Microscan and Phoenix, and 75% by Bruker biotyper. CONCLUSION: As the coverage of type strain‐genome sequence database continues to grow and the cost of DNA sequencing continues to decrease, genome‐based identification can be a useful tool for diagnostic laboratories, with its superior accuracy even over MALDI‐TOF and database‐driven operations.