A comparative study of two different methods of sample preparation for positive blood cultures for the rapid identification of bacteria using MALDI-TOF MS
A comparative study of two different methods of sample preparation for positive blood cultures for the rapid identification of bacteria using MALDI-TOF MS
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s10096-011-1449-x
复制
发表时间：
2012-07-01
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Vila, J.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Juiz, P. M.;Almela, M.;Vila, J.
基质辅助激光解吸/电离飞行时间质谱 (MALDI-TOF MS) 最近已成为微生物实验室快速微生物鉴定的可靠技术。本研究比较了在 MALDI-TOF MS 之前从 85 个阳性血培养物中分离细菌的两种方法：(1) 我们在实验室中使用的传统方法来制备用于药敏试验的细菌；(2) 一种新的商业化技术 (Sepsityper)。无论采用何种细菌分离方法，革兰氏阴性杆菌的鉴定均无显着差异。然而，使用 Sepsityper 方法时，革兰氏阳性球菌的识别率更高（使用内部方法和 Sepsityper 方法，葡萄球菌属水平的鉴定结果分别为 84.15% 和 100%，肠球菌属水平的鉴定结果分别为 57.14% 和 85.71%）。因此，采用 Sepsityper 方法从阳性血培养物中制备细菌更适合 MALDI-TOF MS 进一步鉴定革兰氏阳性球菌。
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has lately been implemented as a solid technology for rapid microorganism identification in microbiology laboratories. This study compares two methods for bacterial separation from 85 positive blood culture before MALDI-TOF MS: (1) a conventional method that we used in our laboratory to prepare bacteria for susceptibility testing and (2) a new commercialized technique (Sepsityper). There were no significant differences in the identification of Gram-negative bacilli regardless of the bacterial separation method used. However, identification was greater for Gram-positive cocci when the Sepsityper method was used (84.15% vs. 100% in the identification to a genus level in staphylococci and 57.14% vs. 85.71% in the identification to a genus level of enterococci with the in-house and Sepsityper methods, respectively). Therefore, the Sepsityper method to prepare bacteria from a positive blood culture is more adequate for the further identification of Gram-positive cocci by MALDI-TOF MS.