CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较并评价两种基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱（matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry, MALDI-TOF-MS）系统---Bruker MALDI Biotyper系统（以下简称Bruker Biotyper系统）和MALDI-TOF Vitek MS系统（以下简称Vitek MS系统）在革兰阴性菌临床分离株鉴定中的应用。方法收集沈阳军区总医院2012年3月-2013年1月分离自血液、尿液、脑脊液、分泌物、伤口拭子和痰液临床标本的革兰阴性菌共120株。应用Vitek 2 Compact生化鉴定系统将每株细菌鉴定到种，而后采用Bruker Biotyper和Vitek MS系统对其进行鉴定，三者鉴定结果存在差异的菌株经16S rDNA测序最终确认菌种。结果对于120株革兰阴性菌临床分离株，Bruker Biotyper和Vitek MS系统在属的水平上正确鉴定率分别为95.0%和92.5%，在种的水平上正确鉴定率分别为89.2%和86.7%，差异均无统计学意义。结论 Bruker Biotyper和Vitek MS系统对革兰阴性菌临床分离株的正确鉴定率不存在差异，两种系统的鉴定结果与各自的图谱数据库有密切关系。
목적：비교병평개량충기질보조격광해흡전리비행시간질보（matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry, MALDI-TOF-MS）계통---Bruker MALDI Biotyper계통（이하간칭Bruker Biotyper계통）화MALDI-TOF Vitek MS계통（이하간칭Vitek MS계통）재혁란음성균림상분리주감정중적응용。방법수집침양군구총의원2012년3월-2013년1월분리자혈액、뇨액、뇌척액、분비물、상구식자화담액림상표본적혁란음성균공120주。응용Vitek 2 Compact생화감정계통장매주세균감정도충，이후채용Bruker Biotyper화Vitek MS계통대기진행감정，삼자감정결과존재차이적균주경16S rDNA측서최종학인균충。결과대우120주혁란음성균림상분리주，Bruker Biotyper화Vitek MS계통재속적수평상정학감정솔분별위95.0%화92.5%，재충적수평상정학감정솔분별위89.2%화86.7%，차이균무통계학의의。결론 Bruker Biotyper화Vitek MS계통대혁란음성균림상분리주적정학감정솔불존재차이，량충계통적감정결과여각자적도보수거고유밀절관계。
Objective To compare and evaluate the use of two matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF-MS) systems, Bruker MALDI Biotyper system (Bruker Biotyper system) and MALDI-TOF Vitek MS sys-tem ( Vitek MS system ) in the identification of Gram-negative clinical isolates. Methods A total of 120 Gram-negative isolates were collected from blood, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, secretion, wound swab and sputum samples from patients treated in General Hos-pital of Shenyang Military Area Command from Mar. 2012 to Jan. 2013. Each isolate was firstly identified to the species by Vitek 2 Compact system, and then identified by Bruker Biotyper system and Vitek MS system. Isolates differently identified by the three sys-tems were finally confirmed by 16S rDNA sequencing as the gold standard. Results Of the 120 isolates, 95.0%were correctly identi-fied to the genus level by Bruker Biotyper system and 92.5%by Vitek MS system, and 89.2%were correctly identified to the species level by Bruker Biotyper system and 86.7%by Vitek MS system, and the differences between them were not significant. Conclusions Bruker Bio-typer system and Vitek MS system were not significantly different in the accuracy rates of identifying clinical Gram-negative isolates. In addition, the identification results of the two systems are closely related to their own databases of pictorial works.