Labormedizinisches zentrum Dr. Risch, Liebefeld, Switzerland.
Swiss Med Wkly. 2010 Sep 24;140:w13095. doi: 10.4414/smw.2010.13095. eCollection 2010.
A completely new approach to diagnose microbial agents at least one day earlier based on mass spectrometric analysis becomes possible in the microbiology laboratory: MALDI TOF: matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionisation time-of-flight. Comparison between results of the new procedure with those obtained by conventional testing is mandatory.
204 clinical isolates grown on agar plates were analysed both, by the MALDI TOF Bruker microflex apparatus and by conventional identification using the VITEK II and API systems, both from bioMérieux.
Of the identified isolates, 72 were gram-positive and 130 gram-negative; 2 were yeasts (candida). Concordance was seen with 61/72 (85%) of the Gram-positive bacteria and with 115/130 (88%) of the Gram-negative bacteria. In 27 samples (13.2%), a discrepancy of the species and/or genus was obvious. The discrepancy appeared with 16 gram-negative (12.2%) and with 11 gram-positive germs (15.3%, n.s.). In the latter group, 6 samples showed discordance with Streptococcus pneumoniae (MALDI) and Streptococcus mitis/oralis (conventional identification) constellation. Among gram-negative samples, most differences occurred on the species level only, e.g. Enterobacter cloacae versus Enterobacter kobei. In 5 cases, discordance was major and appeared on the genus level: Enterobacter/Raoultella, Streptococcus/Gemella, Pseumdomonas/Burkholderia, Microbacter/Sphingomonas and Candida/Cryptococcus. The most outstanding difference was Microbacterium arborescens (MALDI TOF) and Sphingomonas paucimobilis (conventional). Molecular biological identification of two Streptococcus mitis group bacteria confirmed the erroneous diagnosis by MALDI TOF of Streptococcus pneumoniae.
Good comparability between MALDI TOF analysis and conventional identification procedures (86.8%) but special caution is needed when identifying streptococcal species.
微生物学实验室中基于质谱分析的全新微生物检测方法(基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱分析,MALDI-TOF)使得至少提前一天诊断微生物成为可能。新方法的结果必须与传统检测方法的结果进行比较。
将琼脂平板上培养的 204 株临床分离株分别用 MALDI-TOF Bruker microflex 仪和 VITEK II 和 API 系统(均来自生物梅里埃)进行常规鉴定。
鉴定出的 72 株为革兰阳性菌,130 株为革兰阴性菌;2 株为酵母菌(念珠菌属)。革兰阳性菌中,61/72(85%)的结果一致,革兰阴性菌中,115/130(88%)的结果一致。在 27 个样本(13.2%)中,种属的差异明显。革兰阴性菌中有 16 个(12.2%),革兰阳性菌中有 11 个(15.3%,无统计学差异)出现差异。在后一组中,6 个样本与肺炎链球菌(MALDI)和口腔链球菌/中间链球菌(常规鉴定)组合不符。在革兰阴性菌中,大多数差异仅存在于种属水平,如阴沟肠杆菌和产酸克雷伯菌。在 5 个病例中,差异较大,属于属的水平:肠杆菌/罗尔登菌、链球菌/杰氏棒杆菌、假单胞菌/伯克霍尔德菌、微杆菌/鞘氨醇单胞菌和念珠菌/隐球菌。最显著的差异是微杆菌属 arborecens(MALDI-TOF)和少动鞘氨醇单胞菌(常规鉴定)。对 2 株口腔链球菌组细菌的分子生物学鉴定证实了 MALDI-TOF 对肺炎链球菌的错误诊断。
MALDI-TOF 分析与传统鉴定方法具有良好的可比性(86.8%),但在鉴定链球菌种属时需要特别注意。