Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Anaerobe. 2012 Jun;18(3):294-7. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2012.03.008. Epub 2012 Apr 5.

Chemical extraction versus direct smear for MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry identification of anaerobic bacteria.

Author information

  • 1Laboratoire de Bactériologie Hygiène, CHU Lille, France.

Abstract

In the present study, two pre-analytic processes for mass spectrometric bacterial identification were compared: the time-consuming reference method, chemical extraction, and the direct smear technique directly using cultured colonies without any further preparation. These pre-analytic processes were compared in the identification of a total of 238 strains of anaerobic bacteria representing 34 species. The results showed that 218/238 strains were identified following chemical extraction, 185 identifications (77.7%) were secured to both genus and species [log(score) > 2.0] whereas 33 identifications (14%) were secured to genus only [log(score) between 1.7 and 2.0]. Following direct smear, 207/238 anaerobic bacteria were identified, 158 identifications (66.4%) were secured to both genus and species [log(score) > 2.0] whereas 49 identifications were secured to genus only [log(score) between 1.7 and 2.0]. Twenty strains were not identified [log(score) < 1.7] by MALDI-TOF MS following chemical extraction whereas 31 strains were not identified with the direct smear technique. Although direct smear led to a significant decrease of the log(score) values for the Clostridium genus and the Gram positive anaerobic bacteria (GPAC) group (p < 0.0001, Wilcoxon test), identification to both species and genus were not changed. However these differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.1, Chi square). Therefore, MALDI-TOF MS identification following the direct smear technique appears to both non-inferior to the reference method and relevant for anaerobic bacteria identification.

Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PMID:
22503696
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk