Fagundo-Sierra R, Cerros-Santos MA, Pérez-Jáuregui J

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 39-48
PDF size: 112.98 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Highly automated identification systems have been introduced to Clinical Microbiology Laboratories to carry out the identification (ID) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST), which have also allowed detecting new and unusual bacterial strains, to obtain quick and accurate outcomes and to reduce laboratory errors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the BD Phoenix System for ID and AST of clinical isolates. A total of 270 fresh clinical isolates were tested in this study. All were processed simultaneously in the instruments Phoenix (Becton Dickinson) and Vitek 2 (bioMérieux) according to the specifications of each one of the manufacturers. The results from API (bioMérieux) were used for the reference method for ID, agar diffusion, performed according to the CLSI guidelines, was the reference method for AST. The Phoenix agreement for the genus and specie level identification was 98% and 94%, respectively. For AST results, the essential and categorical agreement, in gram-negative strains, were 97% and 92% respectively, with 1% of major discrepancy. In gram-positive strains, the essential and categorical agreements were 99% and 97%, with 0.3% of major discrepancy. The very major error rate, major error rate and minor error rate for all bacterial isolated tested in Phoenix were of 0.3%, 0.7% and 0.03% respectively. The Phoenix system had a good accuracy for ID and AST of the current clinical isolations.

REFERENCES

1. Donay J, Mathieu D, Fernandes P, Prégermain C, Bruel P, et al. Evaluation of the Automated Phoenix System for potential routine use in the clinical microbiology laboratory. J Clin Microbiol 2004; 42: 1542-1546.

2. O’Hara CM. Evaluation of the Phoenix 100 ID/AST System and NID panel for identification of Enterobacteriaceae, Vibrionaceae, and commonly isolated nonenteric gram-negative bacilli. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 928-933.

3. O’Hara CM. Manual and automated instrumentation for identification of Enterobacteriaceae and other aerobic gram-negative bacilli. Clin Microbiol Rev 2005; 18: 147-162.

4. Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute. CLSI. Performance Standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; sixteenth informational supplement. 2006; 26: M100-516.

5. Miller JM. Evaluating biochemical identification systems. J Clin Microbiol 1991; 29: 1559-1561.

6. Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute. CLSI. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility test; approved standard-ninth edition. 2006; 26: M2-A9.

7. Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidelines on review criteria for assessment of antimicrobial susceptibility devices. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Washington, D.C; 2000.

8. Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute. CLSI. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility test for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard-7thed. 2006; 26: M7-A7

9. Funke G, Funke-Kissling P. Evaluation of the new Vitek 2 card for identification of clinically relevant Gram-Negative rods. J Clin Microbiol 2004; 42: 4067-4071.

10. Eigner U, Schmid A, Wild U, Bertsch D, Fahr A. Analysis of the comparative workflow and performance characteristics of the Vitek2 and Phoenix Systems. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43: 3829-3834.

11. Carroll K, Glanz BD, Borek AP, Burger C, Bhally HS, et al. Evaluation of the BD Phoenix automated microbiology system for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Enterobacteriaceae. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 3506-3509.

12. Marco F, Jurado A, Jiménez de Anta MT. Evaluación del sistema Phoenix para la identificación y determinación de la susceptibilidad de aislamientos clínicos. Estudio comparativo con el sistema Microscan. Rev Esp Quimioterap 2004; 17: 169-176.

13. Menozzi MG, Eigner U, Covan S, Rossi S, Somenzi P, et al. Two-center collaborative evaluation of performance of the BD Phoenix automated microbiology system for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of gram-negative bacteria. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 4085-4094.

14. Carroll K, Borek AP, Burger C, Glanz B, Bhally H, Henciak S, et al. Evaluation of the BD Phoenix automated microbiology system for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of staphylococci and enterococci. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 2072-2077.

15. Layer F, Ghebremedhin B, Moder K, Konig W, Konig B. Comparative study using various methods for identification of Staphylococcus species in clinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 2824-2830.

16. Brigante G, Luzzaro F, Bettaccini A, Lombardi G, Meacci F, et al. Use of the Phoenix automated system for identification of Streptococcus and Enterococcus spp. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44: 3263-3267.

17. Fahr AM, Eigner U, Armbrust M, Caganic A, Dettori G, Chezzi C, et al. Two-center collaborative evaluation of the performance of the BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System for identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Enterococcus spp. and Staphylococcus spp. J Clin Microbiol 2003; 41: 1135-1142.

18. Sanguinetti M, Posteraro B, Spanu T, Ciccaglione D, Romano L, Fiori B, et al. Characterization of clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae from Italy by the BD Phoenix Extended-Spectrum b-Lactamase detection method. J Clin Microbiol 2003; 41: 1463-1468.

19. Gross R, Horling U, Eigner U, Fahr A. The importance of extended-spectrum b-lactamase (ESBL) screening test in rapid automated antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST). As presented at the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemoterapy (ICAAC), 2001.

20. Callihan D, Pollitt J, Turng B, Wiles T. BDXpertTM System: Implementing NCCLS and SFM rules in a knowledge base for interpretation of antibiotic susceptibility testing results. As presented at the 13th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ECCMID), 2003.