Comparison of the MicroScan WalkAway and VITEK 2 Compact systems for the identification and susceptibility of clinical Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria
Keywords:
Bacteria, susceptibility antimicrobial test, accuracy, biochemistry/methodsAbstract
Introduction: The accuracy and fastness in bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility are essentials in the management of the hospitalized patients with infectious diseases. Methodology: This study compares the usefulness of the semi-automated VITEK 2® Compact system vs. against the MicroScan WalkAway® SI system for bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility. We included 54 bacterial strains isolated from hospitalized patients, 20 were Gram-positive cocci, 34 Gram-negative rods and 13 reference strains. Results: Of these strains, 89.5% were successfully identified at the species level by both systems. Concordance in susceptibility was 90.2% for Gram-negative and 96.3% for Gram-positive bacteria. Median delay time in obtaining the results of susceptibility testing was 6.5 h for VITEK 2 and 12.5 h for MicroScan. The MicroScan system presented a longer delay in obtaining results and greater difficulty in the correct identification of Gram-negative bacteria, Conclusions: Identification systems are a necessary tool in microbiological laboratories. Prompt and correct identification of clinical isolates aids in appropriate antimicrobial treatment.
References
Rhoads S, Marinelli L, Imperatrice CA, Nachamkin I. Comparison of MicroScan WalkAway system and Vitek system for identification of gram-negative bacteria. J Clin Microbiol. 1995; 33 (11): 3044-3046.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry and FDA. Class II special controls guidance document: antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) systems. Silver Spring, MD: Center for Devices and Radiological Health, U.S. Food and Drug Administration; 2009. Disponible en: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/ MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/ GuidanceDocuments/ucm071462.pdf
Murray P. Manual of clinical microbiology. U.S.A.: American Society for Microbiology; 2007.
Dallas AL, Pekarek PM, Mills TJ, Neal WJ, Smallbrook AG, Hejna J. Comparison of BD Phoenix to Biomerieux Vitek for the identification and susceptibility testing of common bacterial isolates. 2005. Poster session presented at the 105th General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiolgy.
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; twenty- first informational supplement M100-S19. Wayne, PA: CLSI; 2011.
Winstanley T, Courvalin P. Expert systems in clinical microbiology. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2011; 24 (3): 515-556.
Juretschko S, Labombardi VJ, Lerner SA, Schreckenberger PC; Pseudomonas AST Study Group. Accuracies of beta-lactam susceptibility test results for Pseudomonas aeruginosa with four automated systems (BD Phoenix, MicroScan WalkAway, Vitek, and Vitek 2).
J Clin Microbiol. 2007; 45 (4): 1339-1342.
Woodford N, Eastaway AT, Ford M, Leanord A, Keane C, Quayle RM et al. Comparison of BD Phoenix, Vitek 2, and MicroScan automated systems for detection and inference of mechanisms responsible for carbapenem resistance in Enterobacteriaceae. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;
(8): 2999-3002.
Jin WY, Jang SJ, Lee MJ, Park G, Kim MJ, Kook JK et
al. Evaluation of VITEK 2, MicroScan, and Phoenix for identification of clinical isolates and reference strains. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011; 70 (4): 442-447.
Hindler JA, Humphries RM. Colistin MIC variability by method for contemporary clinical isolates of multidrug- resistant Gram-negative bacilli. J Clin Microbiol. 2013; 51 (6): 1678-1684.
Wikler MA; Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute
Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility
testing: Nineteenth informational supplement. Wayne,
PA.: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2009.
Jossart MF, Courcol RJ. Evaluation of an automated system for identification of Enterobacteriaceae and nonfermenting bacilli. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis.
; 18 (12): 902-907.
Moore DF, Zhowandai MH, Ferguson DM, McGee
C, Mott JB, Stewart JC. Comparison of 16S rRNA
sequencing with conventional and commercial phenotypic techniques for identification of enterococci from the marine environment. J Appl Microbiol. 2006; 100 (6): 1272-1281.
Kim M, Heo SR, Choi SH, Kwon H, Park JS, Seong MW et al. Comparison of the MicroScan, VITEK 2, and Crystal GP with 16S rRNA sequencing and MicroSeq 500 v2.0 analysis for coagulase-negative Staphylococci. BMC Microbiol. 2008; 8: 233.
Eigner U, Schmid A, Wild U, Bertsch D, Fahr AM. Analysis of the comparative workflow and performance characteristics of the VITEK 2 and Phoenix systems. J Clin Microbiol. 2005; 43 (8): 3829-3834.
Odumeru JA, Steele M, Fruhner L, Larkin C, Jiang J, Mann E et al. Evaluation of accuracy and repeatability of identification of food-borne pathogens by automated bacterial identification systems. J Clin Microbiol. 1999; 37 (4): 944-949.
Mittman SA, Huard RC, Della-Latta P, Whittier S. Comparison of BD phoenix to vitek 2, microscan MICroSTREP, and Etest for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Streptococcus pneumoniae. J Clin Microbiol. 2009; 47 (11): 3557-3561.
Donay JL, Mathieu D, Fernandes P, Prégermain C, Bruel P, Wargnier A et al. Evaluation of the automated phoenix system for potential routine use in the clinical microbiology laboratory. J Clin Microbiol. 2004; 42 (4): 1542-1546.
Doern GV, Brueggemann AB, Perla R, Daly J, Halkias D, Jones RN et al. Multicenter laboratory evaluation of the bioMérieux Vitek antimicrobial susceptibility testing system with 11 antimicrobial agents versus members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Clin Microbiol. 1997; 35 (8): 2115-2119.
Sader HS, Fritsche TR, Jones RN. Accuracy of three automated systems (MicroScan WalkAway, VITEK, and VITEK 2) for susceptibility testing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa against five broad-spectrum beta-lactam agents. J Clin Microbiol. 2006; 44 (3): 1101-1104.
Cornaglia G, Rossolini GM. The emerging threat of acquired carbapenemases in Gram-negative bacteria. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010; 16 (2): 99-101.
Poirel L, Pitout JD, Nordmann P. Carbapenemases: molecular diversity and clinical consequences. Future Microbiol. 2007; 2 (5): 501-512.
Queenan AM, Bush K. Carbapenemases: the versatile beta-lactamases. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2007; 20 (3): 440- 458, table of contents.
Carmeli Y, Akova M, Cornaglia G, Daikos GL,
Garau J, Harbarth S et al. Controlling the spread of
carbapenemase-producing Gram-negatives: therapeutic
approach and infection control. Clin Microbiol Infect.
; 16 (2): 102-111.
Miriagou V, Cornaglia G, Edelstein M, Galani I, Giske CG,
Gniadkowski M et al. Acquired carbapenemases in Gram- negative bacterial pathogens: detection and surveillance issues. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010; 16 (2): 112-122.
Tenover FC, Williams PP, Stocker S, Thompson A, Clark LA, Limbago B et al. Accuracy of six antimicrobial
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación Luis Guillermo Ibarra Ibarra under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license which allows to reproduce and modify the content if appropiate recognition to the original source is given.
