检验医学 ›› 2022, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (11): 1084-1088.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8640.2022.011.017

• 技术研究与评价·论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

2套质谱系统临床微生物鉴定性能评估

刘聪聪, 李佳萍, 周宏伟()   

  1. 浙江大学医学院附属第二医院检验科,浙江 杭州 310009
  • 收稿日期:2021-04-30 修回日期:2021-12-07 出版日期:2022-11-30 发布日期:2022-12-26
  • 通讯作者: 周宏伟
  • 作者简介:周宏伟,E-mail:zhouhongwei@zju.edu.cn
    刘聪聪,女,1996年生,博士,主要从事微生物鉴定研究。

Performance evaluation of 2 mass spectrometry systems in clinical microbial identification

LIU Congcong, LI Jiaping, ZHOU Hongwei()   

  1. Department of Clinical Laboratory,the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine,Hangzhou 310009,Zhejiang,China
  • Received:2021-04-30 Revised:2021-12-07 Online:2022-11-30 Published:2022-12-26
  • Contact: ZHOU Hongwei

摘要:

目的 评估ASTA MicroIDSys基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF MS)系统及配套CoreDB数据库(简称MicroIDSys系统)和Biotyper MS系统及配套DB2969数据库(简称Biotyper系统)对临床微生物的鉴定能力。方法 收集2012-2020年浙江大学医学院附属第二医院临床微生物实验室留存的934株临床分离菌株和5株标准菌株,覆盖28个属、70个种或种复合体。采用直接涂抹法平行使用2套质谱系统对纳入菌株进行菌种鉴定。当某1套或2套系统鉴定失败,或2套系统鉴定结果不一致时,以聚合酶链反应(PCR)和基因测序方法作为参考方法,判定2套质谱系统鉴定结果的准确性。结果 MicroIDSys系统与Biotyper系统对5株标准菌株均能准确鉴定。对于临床菌株,MicroIDSys系统鉴定准确率为96.1%(898/934),有11株鉴定失败,有25株鉴定错误(鉴定为属内其他菌种);Biotyper系统鉴定准确率为98.3%(918/934),有6株可鉴定至属水平,2株溶血色杆菌无鉴定结果,有8株鉴定错误。结论 MicroIDSys系统和Biotyper系统对临床常见微生物均有很好的鉴定能力,但对一些少见菌种和容易混淆的细菌鉴定能力有限。

关键词: 基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱, 临床微生物, 菌种鉴定, 性能评价

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the performance of matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry(MALDI-TOF MS) ASTA MicroIDSys with CoreDB database(MicroIDSys system) and Bruker Biotyper MS with DB2969 database(Biotyper system) in clinical microbial identification. Methods A total of 934 microorganisms and 5 standard isolates of 28 genera,70 species or species complexes were included from 2012 to 2020 in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine. The control method for microbial identification was performed with a direct smear method,and measured spectra were analyzed using respective software. Polymerase chain reaction(PCR) and sequencing were used as reference methods if either MALDI-TOF MS system could not identify the isolates or had discrepant results. The result accuracy was evaluated. Results Five standard isolates were accurately identified in species level by the 2 MALDI-TOF MS systems. Of 934 clinical isolates,898 isolates(96.1%) were identified correctly by MicroIDSys system,11 isolates had no identification results,and 25 isolates were misidentified(identified as the other species in genus level). The Biotyper system identified correctly 918 isolates(98.3%),6 isolates identified in genus level,2 isolates of Chromobacterium haemolyticum showed “no identification”,and 6 isolates were misidentified. Conclusions The performance of MicroIDSys system was comparable to that of Biotyper system for the identification of clinical microorganisms. However,rare and easily confused bacterial species are challenging.

Key words: Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry, Clinical microbiology, Microbial identification, Performance evaluation

中图分类号: