Cargando…
Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI–TOF MS) has been widely used for microbial identification, because of its speed and accuracy, since its introduction to clinical microbiology laboratories. In this study, we evaluated the performance of ASTA MicroIDS...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8470862/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34574024 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091683 |
_version_ | 1784574308650057728 |
---|---|
author | Chung, Yousun Han, Minje Kim, Jae-Seok |
author_facet | Chung, Yousun Han, Minje Kim, Jae-Seok |
author_sort | Chung, Yousun |
collection | PubMed |
description | Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI–TOF MS) has been widely used for microbial identification, because of its speed and accuracy, since its introduction to clinical microbiology laboratories. In this study, we evaluated the performance of ASTA MicroIDSys, a newly developed MALDI–TOF, and compared it with the widely used Bruker Biotyper. Microbial identification with the Bruker Biotyper system was performed by using a direct smear method and the Bruker Biotyper database (reference library version 6.0.0.0). The isolates were also tested in parallel, using the ASTA MicroIDSys system with a direct smear method and the MicroIDSys database, CoreDB v1.26. A total of 914 clinical isolates were recovered from the clinical specimens. Identical results with confidence scores (≥2.0, for the Bruker Biotyper) and acceptable scores (≥140 for the ASTA MicroIDSys) were obtained for 840 (91.9%) isolates. The minor errors were defined as misidentification at the species level, and the rate was 1.1% (9/792) for Bruker Biotyper and 1.6% (13/792) for ASTA MicroIDSys. Major errors were defined as misidentification at the genus level, and the rate was 0.3% (2/792) for both Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys. ASTA MicroIDSys showed reliable performance for microbial identification, which was comparable to that of the Bruker Biotyper. Therefore, ASTA MicroIDSys can be applied for the identification of microorganisms in clinical microbiology laboratories. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8470862 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84708622021-09-27 Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory Chung, Yousun Han, Minje Kim, Jae-Seok Diagnostics (Basel) Article Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI–TOF MS) has been widely used for microbial identification, because of its speed and accuracy, since its introduction to clinical microbiology laboratories. In this study, we evaluated the performance of ASTA MicroIDSys, a newly developed MALDI–TOF, and compared it with the widely used Bruker Biotyper. Microbial identification with the Bruker Biotyper system was performed by using a direct smear method and the Bruker Biotyper database (reference library version 6.0.0.0). The isolates were also tested in parallel, using the ASTA MicroIDSys system with a direct smear method and the MicroIDSys database, CoreDB v1.26. A total of 914 clinical isolates were recovered from the clinical specimens. Identical results with confidence scores (≥2.0, for the Bruker Biotyper) and acceptable scores (≥140 for the ASTA MicroIDSys) were obtained for 840 (91.9%) isolates. The minor errors were defined as misidentification at the species level, and the rate was 1.1% (9/792) for Bruker Biotyper and 1.6% (13/792) for ASTA MicroIDSys. Major errors were defined as misidentification at the genus level, and the rate was 0.3% (2/792) for both Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys. ASTA MicroIDSys showed reliable performance for microbial identification, which was comparable to that of the Bruker Biotyper. Therefore, ASTA MicroIDSys can be applied for the identification of microorganisms in clinical microbiology laboratories. MDPI 2021-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC8470862/ /pubmed/34574024 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091683 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Chung, Yousun Han, Minje Kim, Jae-Seok Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory |
title | Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory |
title_full | Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory |
title_fullStr | Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory |
title_short | Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of bruker biotyper and asta microidsys for species identification in a clinical microbiology laboratory |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8470862/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34574024 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091683 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chungyousun comparativeevaluationofbrukerbiotyperandastamicroidsysforspeciesidentificationinaclinicalmicrobiologylaboratory AT hanminje comparativeevaluationofbrukerbiotyperandastamicroidsysforspeciesidentificationinaclinicalmicrobiologylaboratory AT kimjaeseok comparativeevaluationofbrukerbiotyperandastamicroidsysforspeciesidentificationinaclinicalmicrobiologylaboratory |