| Literature DB >> 26422150 |
Margarida Neves Souza1, Stéfanie Otowicz Ortiz1, Marcelo Martins Mello1, Flávio de Mattos Oliveira2, Luiz Carlos Severo2, Cristine Souza Goebel1.
Abstract
Infection by Candida spp. is associated with high mortality rates, especially when treatment is not appropriate and/or not immediate. Therefore, it is necessary to correctly identify the genus and species of Candida. The aim of this study was to compare the identification of 89 samples of Candida spp. by the manual methods germ tube test, auxanogram and chromogenic medium in relation to the ID 32C automated method. The concordances between the methods in ascending order, measured by the Kappa index were: ID 32C with CHROMagar Candida(κ = 0.38), ID 32C with auxanogram (κ = 0.59) and ID 32C with germ tube (κ = 0.9). One of the species identified in this study was C. tropicalis,which demonstrated a sensitivity of 46.2%, a specificity of 95.2%, PPV of 80%, NPV of 81.1%, and an accuracy of 80.9% in tests performed with CHROMagar Candida;and a sensitivity of 76.9%, a specificity of 96.8%, PPV of 90.9%, NPV of 91%, and an accuracy of 91% in the auxanogram tests. Therefore, it is necessary to know the advantages and limitations of methods to choose the best combination between them for a fast and correct identification of Candida species.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26422150 PMCID: PMC4616911 DOI: 10.1590/S0036-46652015000400002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Inst Med Trop Sao Paulo ISSN: 0036-4665 Impact factor: 1.846
Comparison of frequencies and percentages found in the results obtained by methods ID 32C, germ tube test, CHROMagar Candida and auxanogram
| Specie | ID 32C | Germ tube test | CHROMagar | Auxanogram |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 28 (31.46%) | 27 (30.34%) | 29 (32.58%) | 23 (25.83%) |
|
| 26 (29.21%) | 0 | 15 (16.85%) | 22 (24.72%) |
|
| 19 (21.35%) | 0 | 0 | 13 (14.61%) |
|
| 5 (5.62%) | 0 | 0 | 2 (2.25%) |
|
| 3 (3.39%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 2 (2.25%) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.12%) |
|
| 1 (1.12%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 (1.12%) | 0 | 0 | 2 (2.25%) |
|
| 1 (1.12%) | 0 | 21 (23.6%) | 2(2.25%) |
|
| 1 (1.12%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 (1.12%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 1 (1.12%) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 (2.25%) |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.12%) |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 (4.50%) |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 (4.50%) |
|
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (1.12%) |
|
| 0 | 62 (69.66%) | 24 (26.97%) | 12 (13.48%) |
|
| 89 (100%) | 89 (100%) | 89 (100%) | 89 (100%) |
Agreement between the methods compared to the ID 32C. The samples were grouped into groups containing only species that could be identified by both methods
| Groups | Germ tube | CHROMagar | Auxanogram | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | kappa | N | kappa | N | kappa | |||
|
| 27 | 0.9 | 29 | 0.38 | 23 | 0.59 | ||
|
| - | - | 2 | |||||
|
| - | - | 2 | |||||
|
| - | - | 1 | |||||
|
| - | 21 | 2 | |||||
|
| - | - | 13 | |||||
|
| - | 15 | 22 | |||||
| Other species | 62 | 24 | 24 | |||||
|
| 89 | 89 | 89 | |||||
Diagnostics performances (sensitivity, specificity, predictive value and accuracy) of manual methods and concordance between the methods in relation to the ID 32C, considering only the species C. albicans
|
| ID 32C (+) | ID 32C (-) | Total | Sensibility (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | Accuracy (%) | Kappa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Germ tube (+) | 25 | 2 | 27 | ||||||
| Germ tube (-) | 3 | 59 | 62 | 89.3 | 96.7 | 92.6 | 95.2 | 94.4 | 0.9 |
|
| 28 | 61 | 89 | ||||||
| CHROMagar (+) | 22 | 7 | 29 | ||||||
| CHROMagar (-) | 6 | 54 | 60 | 78.6 | 88.5 | 75.9 | 90.0 | 85.4 | 0.7 |
|
| 28 | 61 | 89 | ||||||
| Auxanogram (+) | 20 | 3 | 23 | ||||||
| Auxanogram (-) | 8 | 58 | 66 | 71.4 | 95.1 | 87.0 | 87.9 | 87.6 | 0.6 |
|
| 28 | 61 | 89 |
Diagnostics performances (sensitivity, specificity, predictive value and accuracy) of manual methods and concordance between the methods in relation to the ID 32C considering only the species C. tropicalis
|
| ID 32C (+) | ID 32C (-) | Total | Sensibility (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | Accuracy (%) | Kappa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CHROMagar (+) | 12 | 3 | 15 | ||||||
| CHROMagar (-) | 14 | 60 | 74 | 46.2 | 95.2 | 80 | 81.1 | 80.9 | 0.5 |
|
| 26 | 63 | 89 | ||||||
| Auxanogram (+) | 20 | 2 | 22 | ||||||
| Auxanogram (-) | 6 | 61 | 67 | 76.9 | 96.8 | 90.9 | 91.0 | 91.0 | 0.8 |
|
| 26 | 63 | 89 |