COMPARISON OF THE AUTOSCAN-W/A RAPID BACTERIAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM AND THE VITEK AUTOMICROBIC SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFICATION OF GRAM-NEGATIVE BACILLI

被引:24
作者
PFALLER, MA
SAHM, D
OHARA, C
CIAGLIA, C
YU, M
YAMANE, N
SCHARNWEBER, G
RHODEN, D
机构
[1] VET AFFAIRS MED CTR,IOWA CITY,IA 52242
[2] UNIV IOWA,COLL MED,IOWA CITY,IA 52242
[3] UNIV CHICAGO,CHICAGO,IL 60637
[4] CTR DIS CONTROL,ATLANTA,GA 30333
关键词
D O I
10.1128/JCM.29.7.1422-1428.1991
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
The autoSCAN-W/A (W/A; Baxter MicroScan, West Sacramento, Calif.) with the new fluorometric Rapid Neg Combo 1 (RNC) panel is a fully automated fluorometric system for identification of both enteric and nonenteric gram-negative bacilli within 2 h. We compared the W/A with the Vitek AutoMicrobic System (Vitek AMS; Vitek Systems, Inc., Hazelwood, Mo.) for identification of 383 clinical isolates of gram-negative bacilli. The API 20E (Analytab Products, Plainview, N.Y.) and conventional biochemical testing were used as the reference systems. The W/A correctly identified 336 isolates (87.7%) to the species level and classified an additional 29 isolates (7.6%) as correct with low probability (overall identification = 95.3%); the Vitek AMS correctly identified 355 isolates (92.7%) to the species level and classified an additional 8 isolates (2.1%) as correct with low probability (overall identification = 94.8%). A common set of 134 isolates of gram-negative bacilli was tested in both participating laboratories as a means of assessing interlaboratory agreement with both the W/A and the Vitek AMS. The overall agreements between the two laboratories were 86% with the W/A and 92% with the Vitek AMS. The W/A performed comparably to the Vitek AMS for identification of most gram-negative bacilli, actually exceeding the Vitek AMS for identification of nonenteric bacilli. Rapid time to identification and a high level of automation make the W/A an attractive system for clinical microbiology laboratories.
引用
收藏
页码:1422 / 1428
页数:7
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   CORRELATION STUDIES OF ENTERO-SET 20, API 20E, AND CONVENTIONAL MEDIA SYSTEMS FOR ENTEROBACTERIACEAE IDENTIFICATION [J].
ALDRIDGE, KE ;
HODGES, RL .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1981, 13 (01) :120-125
[2]   TIME-MOTION AND COST COMPARISON STUDY OF MICRO-ID, API 20E, AND CONVENTIONAL BIOCHEMICAL TESTING IN IDENTIFICATION OF ENTEROBACTERIACEAE [J].
BALE, MJ ;
MATSEN, JM .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1981, 14 (06) :665-670
[3]   SENSITIVITY, SPECIFICITY, AND REPRODUCIBILITY OF THE AUTOMICROBIC SYSTEM (WITH THE ENTEROBACTERIACEAE-PLUS BIOCHEMICAL CARD) FOR IDENTIFYING CLINICAL ISOLATES OF GRAM-NEGATIVE BACILLI [J].
BARRY, AL ;
GAVAN, TL ;
BADAL, RE ;
TELENSON, MJ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1982, 15 (04) :582-588
[4]  
COLTON T, 1974, STAT MED, P174
[5]   NOVEL APPLICATION OF VIDEO IMAGE-PROCESSING TO BIOCHEMICAL AND ANTIMICROBIAL SUSCEPTIBILITY TESTING [J].
DAMATO, RF ;
ISENBERG, HD ;
MCKINLEY, GA ;
BARON, EJ ;
TEPPER, R ;
SHULMAN, M .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1988, 26 (08) :1492-1495
[6]   THE SYSTEMS-APPROACH TO DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY [J].
DAMATO, RF ;
HOLMES, B ;
BOTTONE, EJ .
CRC CRITICAL REVIEWS IN MICROBIOLOGY, 1981, 9 (01) :1-44
[7]  
DEBATES M, 1989, ANNU M AM SOC MICROB, P437
[8]   EVALUATION OF THE UPDATED MS-2 BACTERIAL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM IN COMPARISON WITH THE API 20E SYSTEM [J].
DIPERSIO, JR ;
DYKE, JW ;
VANNEST, RD .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 1983, 18 (01) :128-135
[9]  
EDBERG SC, 1982, J CLIN LAB AUTOMAT, V2, P263
[10]  
Edwards PR., 1972, IDENTIFICATION ENTER