Next Article in Journal
Predict Treatment Response by Magnetic Resonance Diffusion Weighted Imaging: A Preliminary Study on 46 Meningiomas Treated with Proton-Therapy
Previous Article in Journal
Concomitant Talocalcaneal Coalition as a Risk Factor for Early Relapse Following Ponseti Treatment of Idiopathic Clubfoot
 
 
Article

Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory

by 1, 1 and 1,2,*
1
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Kangdong Sacred Heart Hospital, Seoul 05355, Korea
2
Department of Laboratory Medicine, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon 24252, Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Georgina Tzanakaki
Diagnostics 2021, 11(9), 1683; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091683
Received: 12 August 2021 / Revised: 27 August 2021 / Accepted: 14 September 2021 / Published: 15 September 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease)
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. View Full-Text
Keywords: matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI–TOF MS); microorganism; identification matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI–TOF MS); microorganism; identification
MDPI and ACS Style

Chung, Y.; Han, M.; Kim, J.-S. Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory. Diagnostics 2021, 11, 1683. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091683

AMA Style

Chung Y, Han M, Kim J-S. Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory. Diagnostics. 2021; 11(9):1683. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091683

Chicago/Turabian Style

Chung, Yousun, Minje Han, and Jae-Seok Kim. 2021. "Comparative Evaluation of Bruker Biotyper and ASTA MicroIDSys for Species Identification in a Clinical Microbiology Laboratory" Diagnostics 11, no. 9: 1683. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics11091683

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop