Suppr超能文献

直接菌落法与提取法在布鲁克生物梅里埃基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱技术鉴定革兰阳性球菌中的比较。

Comparison of direct colony method versus extraction method for identification of gram-positive cocci by use of Bruker Biotyper matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry.

机构信息

Mayo Clinic, 200 First St. SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Aug;49(8):2868-73. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00506-11. Epub 2011 May 25.

Abstract

We evaluated Bruker Biotyper (version 2.0) matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry (MS) for the identification of 305 clinical isolates of staphylococci, streptococci, and related genera by comparing direct colony testing with preparatory extraction. Isolates were previously identified by use of phenotypic testing and/or 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Manufacturer-specified score cutoffs for genus- and species-level identification were used. After excluding 7 isolates not present in the Biotyper library, the Biotyper correctly identified 284 (95%) and 207 (69%) isolates to the genus and species levels, respectively, using extraction. By using direct colony testing, the Biotyper identified 168 (56%) and 60 (20%) isolates to the genus and species levels, respectively. Overall, more isolates were identified to the genus and species levels with preparatory extraction than with direct colony testing (P < 0.0001). The analysis was repeated after dividing the isolates into two subgroups, staphylococci, streptococci, and enterococci (n = 217) and "related genera" (n = 81). For the former subgroup, the extraction method resulted in the identification of 213 (98%) and 171 (79%) isolates to the genus and species levels, respectively, whereas the direct colony method identified 136 (63%) and 56 (26%) isolates to the genus and species levels, respectively. In contrast, for the subgroup of related genera, the extraction method identified 71 (88%) and 36 (44%) isolates to the genus and species levels, respectively, while the direct colony method identified 32 (40%) and 4 (5%) isolates to the genus and species levels, respectively. For both subgroups, preparatory extraction was superior to direct colony testing for the identification of isolates to the genus and species levels (P < 0.0001). Preparatory extraction is needed for the identification of a substantial proportion of Gram-positive cocci using the Biotyper method according to manufacturer-specified score cutoffs.

摘要

我们通过比较直接菌落检测与预备提取,评估了布鲁克 Biotyper(2.0 版)基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间(MALDI-TOF)质谱(MS)对 305 株葡萄球菌、链球菌和相关属临床分离株的鉴定。分离株先前通过表型检测和/或 16S rRNA 基因测序进行鉴定。使用制造商规定的用于属和种水平鉴定的得分临界值。排除不在 Biotyper 文库中的 7 株分离株后,提取法使 Biotyper 分别正确鉴定了 284(95%)和 207(69%)株菌到属和种水平,而直接菌落检测法分别鉴定了 168(56%)和 60(20%)株菌到属和种水平。总的来说,与直接菌落检测相比,预备提取法能更准确地鉴定出属和种水平的分离株(P < 0.0001)。分析完成后,将分离株分为葡萄球菌、链球菌和肠球菌(n = 217)和“相关属”(n = 81)两组,再次重复该分析。对于前一组,提取方法分别鉴定出 213(98%)和 171(79%)株菌到属和种水平,而直接菌落方法分别鉴定出 136(63%)和 56(26%)株菌到属和种水平。相比之下,对于相关属组,提取方法分别鉴定出 71(88%)和 36(44%)株菌到属和种水平,而直接菌落方法分别鉴定出 32(40%)和 4(5%)株菌到属和种水平。对于两个亚组,与直接菌落检测相比,预备提取法在鉴定属和种水平的分离株方面均更具优势(P < 0.0001)。根据制造商规定的得分临界值,使用 Biotyper 方法需要对大部分革兰氏阳性球菌进行预备提取以进行鉴定。

相似文献

8
Evaluation of the Bruker MALDI Biotyper for Identification of Fastidious Gram-Negative Rods.
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Mar;54(3):543-8. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03107-15. Epub 2015 Dec 9.
10
Identification of clinical isolates of anaerobic bacteria using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012 Sep;31(9):2257-62. doi: 10.1007/s10096-012-1563-4. Epub 2012 Feb 28.

引用本文的文献

1
MALDI-TOF MS Biomarkers for Methicillin-Resistant Detection: A Systematic Review.
Metabolites. 2025 Aug 8;15(8):540. doi: 10.3390/metabo15080540.
3
Biocidal Properties of New Silver Nanoparticles Argirium SUNc Against Food Hygiene Indicator Microorganisms.
Nanomaterials (Basel). 2025 Feb 14;15(4):295. doi: 10.3390/nano15040295.
4
Investigation of growth and sporulation during larval rearing.
Heliyon. 2024 Dec 7;10(24):e40912. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40912. eCollection 2024 Dec 30.
5
Establishment and application of a rapid new detection method for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of based on MALDI-TOF MS.
Microbiol Spectr. 2025 Jan 7;13(1):e0134624. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.01346-24. Epub 2024 Dec 10.
7
Combinatory Effect of Nitroxoline and Gentamicin in the Control of Uropathogenic Enterococci Infections.
Antibiotics (Basel). 2024 Sep 1;13(9):829. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics13090829.
8
Isolation of Aerobic Bacterial Species Associated with Palpable Udder Defects in Non-Dairy Ewes.
Animals (Basel). 2024 Aug 9;14(16):2317. doi: 10.3390/ani14162317.
9
Application of MALDI-TOF MS to Identify and Detect Antimicrobial-Resistant Associated with Bovine Mastitis.
Microorganisms. 2024 Jun 29;12(7):1332. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms12071332.

本文引用的文献

6
Comparison of MALDI TOF with conventional identification of clinically relevant bacteria.
Swiss Med Wkly. 2010 Sep 24;140:w13095. doi: 10.4414/smw.2010.13095. eCollection 2010.
7
8
MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry tools for bacterial identification in clinical microbiology laboratory.
Clin Biochem. 2011 Jan;44(1):104-9. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2010.06.017. Epub 2010 Jul 8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验