Utility of platforms Viteks MS and Microflex LT for the identification of complex clinical isolates that require molecular methods for their taxonomic classification

PLoS One. 2019 Jul 3;14(7):e0218077. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218077. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

Mass spectrometry has revolutionized the clinical microbiology field in America's and Europe's industrialized countries, for being a fast, reliable and inexpensive technique. Our study is based on the comparison of the performance of two commercial platforms, Microflex LT (Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany) and Vitek MS (bioMérieux, Marcy l´Etoile, France) for the identification of unusual and hard-to-diagnose microorganisms in a Reference Laboratory in Argentina. During a four-month period (February-May 2018) the diagnostic efficiency and the concordance between both systems were assessed, and the results were compared with the polyphasic taxonomic identification of all isolates. The study included 265 isolates: 77 Gram-Negative Bacilli, 33 Gram-Positive Cocci, 40 Anaerobes, 35 Actinomycetales, 19 Fastidious Microorganisms and 61 Gram-Positive Bacilli. All procedures were practiced according to the manufacturer's recommendations in each case by duplicate, and strictly in parallel. Other relevant factors, such as the utility of the recommended extraction protocols, reagent stability and connectivity were also evaluated. Both systems correctly identified the majority of the isolates to species and complex level (82%, 217/265). Vitex MS achieved a higher number of correct species-level identifications between the gram-positive microorganisms; however, it presented greater difficulty in the identification of non-fermenting bacilli and a higher number of incorrect identifications when the profile of the microorganism was not represented in the commercial database. Both platforms showed an excellent performance on the identification of anaerobic bacteria and fastidious species. Both systems enabled the fast and reliable identification of most of the tested isolates and were shown to be very practical for the user.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study

MeSH terms

  • Gram-Negative Bacteria* / classification
  • Gram-Negative Bacteria* / isolation & purification
  • Gram-Negative Bacteria* / metabolism
  • Gram-Positive Bacteria* / classification
  • Gram-Positive Bacteria* / isolation & purification
  • Gram-Positive Bacteria* / metabolism
  • Humans
  • Mass Spectrometry*

Grants and funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.