...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Phoenix 100 versus Vitek 2 in the Identification of Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria: a Comprehensive Meta-Analysis
【24h】

Phoenix 100 versus Vitek 2 in the Identification of Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria: a Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

机译:Phoenix 100与Vitek 2在革兰氏阳性细菌和革兰氏阴性细菌鉴定中的应用:全面的荟萃分析

获取原文
           

摘要

Phoenix 100 and Vitek 2 (operating with the current colorimetric cards) are commonly used in hospital laboratories for rapid identification of microorganisms. The present meta-analysis aims to evaluate and compare their performance on Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. The MEDLINE database was searched up to October 2010 for the retrieval of relevant articles. Pooled correct identification rates were derived from random-effects models, using the arcsine transformation. Separate analyses were conducted at the genus and species levels; subanalyses and meta-regression were undertaken to reveal meaningful system- and study-related modifiers. A total of 29 (6,635 isolates) and 19 (4,363 isolates) articles were eligible for Phoenix and colorimetric Vitek 2, respectively. No significant differences were observed between Phoenix and Vitek 2 either at the genus (97.70% versus 97.59%, P = 0.919) or the species (92.51% versus 88.77%, P = 0.149) level. Studies conducted with conventional comparator methods tended to report significantly better results compared to those using molecular reference techniques. Speciation of Staphylococcus aureus was significantly more accurate in comparison to coagulase-negative staphylococci by both Phoenix (99.78% versus 88.42%, P < 0.00001) and Vitek 2 (98.22% versus 91.89%, P = 0.043). Vitek 2 also reached higher correct identification rates for Gram-negative fermenters versus nonfermenters at the genus (99.60% versus 95.90%, P = 0.004) and the species (97.42% versus 84.85%, P = 0.003) level. In conclusion, the accuracy of both systems seems modified by underlying sample- and comparator method-related parameters. Future simultaneous assessment of the instruments against molecular comparator procedures may facilitate interpretation of the current observations.
机译:Phoenix 100和Vitek 2(与当前的比色卡配合使用)通常在医院实验室中用于快速鉴定微生物。本荟萃分析旨在评估和比较其在革兰氏阳性和阴性细菌上的表现。检索MEDLINE数据库直至2010年10月,以检索相关文章。使用反正弦变换从随机效应模型中得出正确的合并识别率。在属和种水平上分别进行了分析;进行了子分析和荟萃回归,以揭示有意义的系统和研究相关的修饰语。共有29篇(6,635株)和19篇(4,363株)的产品分别适用于Phoenix和比色Vitek 2。 Phoenix和Vitek 2在属(97.70%对97.59%, P = 0.919)或物种(92.51%对88.77%, P = 0.149)级别。与使用分子参考技术的研究相比,使用常规比较器方法进行的研究倾向于报告明显更好的结果。 Phoenix(99.78%vs 88.42%, P <0.00001)和Vitek 2(98.22%vs 91.89%, P)的金黄色葡萄球菌形态与凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌相比要准确得多。 = 0.043)。 Vitek 2在革兰氏阴性发酵罐中比非发酵罐(99.60%对95.90%, P = 0.004)和该物种(97.42%对84.85%, P)具有更高的正确识别率。 = 0.003)级别。总之,两个系统的准确性似乎都受到与样本和比较器方法相关的基本参数的影响。将来根据分子比较器程序同时评估仪器可能有助于解释当前的观察结果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号