| Literature DB >> 34869072 |
Jing Gao1, Qiujing Chen2, Yiqian Peng1, Nanyan Jiang1, Youhao Shi1, Chunmei Ying1.
Abstract
Objective: Automation is increasingly being applied in clinical laboratories; however, preanalytical processing for microbiology tests and screening is still largely performed using manual methods owing to the complex procedures involved. To promote automation of clinical microbiology laboratories, it is important to assess the performance of automated systems for different specimen types separately. Therefore, the aim of this study was to explore the potential clinical application of the Copan Walk Away Specimen Processor (WASP) automated preanalytical microbiology processing system in the detection of pathogens in female reproductive tract specimens and its feasibility in optimizing diagnostic procedures.Entities:
Keywords: Copan WASP; Copan-ESwab; automation; bacteriology,; diagnostic; female reproductive tract specimens
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34869072 PMCID: PMC8635742 DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.770367
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol ISSN: 2235-2988 Impact factor: 5.293
The types of bacteria, number of colonies and comparison of the detection rate of single colonies detected using manual and automated inoculation methods.
| Female lower genital tract specimens (n=402) | Manual inoculation | Copan WASP |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Types of bacteria detected per specimen (mean ± SD) | 2.25 ± 1.23 | 1.93 ± 1.08 | <0.001 |
| Number of bacteria detected per specimen (mean ± SD) | 422.77 ± 231.65 | 173.79 ± 126.25 | <0.001 |
| Detectable single colonies (n/%) | 117/29.10 | 297/73.88 | <0.001 |
| Undetectable single colonies (n/%) | 285/70.90 | 105/26.12 |
Figure 1Difference in streaking patterns between Copan wasp and manual method.
Figure 2Difference in detection rate of single colonies between Copan wasp and manual method: For 402 samples we detected, 73.88% of them could directly incubate single colonies for identification within 48 hours by using Copan WASP, but this rate was only 29.10% if using manual method. It demonstrated that the identification result could be gained more quickly by using Copan WASP (P< 0.001).
Comparison of the isolation and cultivation efficiencies of common pathogens.
| Pathogen species | Detection status | Manual inoculation | Copan WASP |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GBS | positive(n/%) | 20/4.98 | 17/4.23 | 0.737 |
| negative(n/%) | 382/95.02 | 385/95.77 | ||
| Candida | positive(n/%) | 54/13.43 | 53/13.18 | 0.917 |
| negative(n/%) | 348/86.57 | 349/86.82 |
Application of Copan-ESwab tubes in the detection of common pathogens in female urogenital tracts via a fluorescence-based qPCR assay, immunochromatographic and culture.
| Pathogen species | Inoculation method | qPCR | Immunochromatographic | Culture |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CT | positive(n/%) | 13/3.23 | 1/0.25 | Not Detected | 0.002 |
| negative(n/%) | 389/96.77 | 401/99.75 | Not Detected | ||
| UU | positive(n/%) | 160/39.80 | NotDetected | 192/47.76 | 0.027 |
| negative(n/%) | 242/60.20 | NotDetected | 210/52.23 | ||
| GBS | positive(n/%) | 14/3.48 | NotDetected | 17/4.23 | 0.715 |
| negative(n/%) | 388/96.52 | NotDetected | 385/95.78 |