Suppr超能文献

比较布鲁克 Biotyper 和 Vitek MS 基质辅助激光解吸/电离飞行时间质谱平台在丝状真菌鉴定中的应用。

Comparison of Bruker Biotyper and Vitek MS matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight mass spectrometry platforms for the identification of filamentous fungi.

机构信息

Department of Pathology & Immunology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX 77030, USA.

Department of Pathology, Texas Children's Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA.

出版信息

Future Microbiol. 2023 Jun;18:553-561. doi: 10.2217/fmb-2023-0084. Epub 2023 Jun 15.

Abstract

To evaluate the performance of two matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight mass spectrometry platforms to identify molds isolated from clinical specimens. Fifty mold isolates were analyzed on Bruker Biotyper and Vitek MS platforms. Two Bruker Biotyper extraction protocols were assessed alongside the US FDA-approved extraction protocol for Vitek MS. The Bruker Biotyper modified NIH-developed extraction protocol correctly identified more isolates than Bruker's protocol (56 vs 33%). For species in the manufacturers' databases, Vitek MS correctly identified 85% of isolates, with 8% misidentifications. The Bruker Biotyper identified 64%, with no misidentifications. For isolates not in the databases, the Bruker Biotyper did not misidentify any, and Vitek MS misidentified 36%. Both the Vitek MS and Bruker Biotyper accurately identified the fungal isolates, however Vitek MS was more likely to misidentify isolates than the Bruker Biotyper.

摘要

评估两种基质辅助激光解吸/电离飞行时间质谱平台鉴定从临床标本中分离的霉菌的性能。对 50 株霉菌分离物进行了 Bruker Biotyper 和 Vitek MS 平台的分析。评估了两种 Bruker Biotyper 提取方案以及美国 FDA 批准的 Vitek MS 提取方案。Bruker Biotyper 改良的 NIH 开发的提取方案比 Bruker 的方案正确识别出更多的分离物(56 比 33%)。对于制造商数据库中的物种,Vitek MS 正确识别出 85%的分离物,有 8%的错误识别。Bruker Biotyper 识别出 64%,没有错误识别。对于不在数据库中的分离物,Bruker Biotyper 没有错误识别,而 Vitek MS 错误识别了 36%。Vitek MS 和 Bruker Biotyper 都能准确地识别真菌分离物,但 Vitek MS 比 Bruker Biotyper 更有可能错误识别分离物。

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