↓ Skip to main content

Rapid and reliable identification of Gram-negative bacteria and Gram-positive cocci by deposition of bacteria harvested from blood cultures onto the MALDI-TOF plate

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Microbiology, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Rapid and reliable identification of Gram-negative bacteria and Gram-positive cocci by deposition of bacteria harvested from blood cultures onto the MALDI-TOF plate
Published in
BMC Microbiology, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12866-015-0459-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simona Barnini, Emilia Ghelardi, Veronica Brucculeri, Paola Morici, Antonella Lupetti

Abstract

Rapid identification of the causative agent(s) of bloodstream infections using the matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) methodology can lead to increased empirical antimicrobial therapy appropriateness. Herein, we aimed at establishing an easier and simpler method, further referred to as the direct method, using bacteria harvested by serum separator tubes from positive blood cultures and placed onto the polished steel target plate for rapid identification by MALDI-TOF. The results by the direct method were compared with those obtained by MALDI-TOF on bacteria isolated on solid media. Identification of Gram-negative bacilli was 100 % concordant using the direct method or MALDI-TOF on isolated bacteria (96 % with score > 2.0). These two methods were 90 % concordant on Gram-positive cocci (32 % with score > 2.0). Identification by the SepsiTyper method of Gram-positive cocci gave concordant results with MALDI-TOF on isolated bacteria in 87 % of cases (37 % with score > 2.0). The direct method herein developed allows rapid identification (within 30 min) of Gram-negative bacteria and Gram-positive cocci from positive blood cultures and can be used to rapidly report reliable and accurate results, without requiring skilled personnel or the use of expensive kits.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 65 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Student > Master 7 11%
Researcher 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Other 15 23%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 11 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Unspecified 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 20 31%