Literature DB >> 2199485

Accuracy and reproducibility of the MicroScan rapid anaerobe identification system with an automated reader.

L Stoakes1, T Kelly, K Manarin, B Schieven, R Lannigan, D Groves, Z Hussain.   

Abstract

Rapid anaerobe identification (MicroScan) panels (4 h) were evaluated both visually and by the AutoScan-4, a computer-controlled microplate reader. The results of both reading methods were compared with identifications obtained by the conventional (Virginia Polytechnic Institute) method. In total, 237 anaerobes were tested. Correct identifications were obtained for 166 strains (70%) by visual reading and 157 strains (66.2%) by the AutoScan-4. Supplementary tests resulted in 80.1 and 76.7% total correct identifications, respectively. Comparison of the two reading methods revealed complete agreement for 169 strains. Differences between the two reading methods were due to difficulties in reading specific reactions. This was especially true with the clostridial species. The performance of the MicroScan system in the identification of anaerobic bacteria appears comparable to that of other 4-h identification systems for anaerobes, but this system shows significant variance from the conventional system. Improvements in the trays and data base are required before the system can be recommended for routine use.

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2199485      PMCID: PMC267891          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.28.6.1135-1138.1990

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of the PRAS II, AN-Ident, and RapID-ANA systems for identification of anaerobic bacteria.

Authors:  R S Burlage; P D Ellner
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Comparative evaluation of RapID ANA and API 20 A for identification of anaerobic bacteria.

Authors:  P Summanen; H Jousimies-Somer
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  Comparison of RapID-ANA and Minitek with a conventional method for biochemical identification of anaerobes.

Authors:  Z Hussain; R Lannigan; B C Schieven; L Stoakes; T Kelly; D Groves
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 2.803

4.  Comparison of PRAS II, RapID ANA, and API 20A systems for identification of anaerobic bacteria.

Authors:  N O Karachewski; E L Busch; C L Wells
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1985-01       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Accuracy and reproducibility of a four-hour method for anaerobe identification.

Authors:  P C Appelbaum; C S Kaufmann; J W Depenbusch
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1985-06       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Comparative evaluation of three identification systems for anaerobes.

Authors:  P R Murray; C J Weber; A C Niles
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Use of the RapID-ANA System to screen for enzyme activities that differ among species of bile-inhibited Bacteroides.

Authors:  C A Dellinger; L V Moore
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1986-02       Impact factor: 5.948

  7 in total
  4 in total

Review 1.  Automated systems for identification of microorganisms.

Authors:  C E Stager; J R Davis
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 26.132

2.  Evaluation of the new RapID-ANA II system for the identification of clinical anaerobic isolates.

Authors:  L M Marler; J A Siders; L C Wolters; Y Pettigrew; B L Skitt; S D Allen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1991-05       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Evaluation of the autoSCAN-W/A system for rapid (2-hour) identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae.

Authors:  C M O'Hara; J M Miller
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Evaluation of the MicroScan Rapid Yeast Identification panel.

Authors:  G St Germain; D Beauchesne
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 5.948

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.