MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283781183 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofv133.819

Direct Rapid Identification of Bacteria From Positive Blood Cultures Using the Bruker MALDI Biotyper and Serum Separator Tubes

2015· article· en· W2283781183 on OpenAlexaff
Dale Purych, Manal Tadros, Valerie Field, Amandeep Minhas, Jeannette Hoeksema, Bo Lien, Anita Kingsbury, Benjamin Mack, Susan Roman, J. Bruce Tomblin

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSeparator (oil production)Pathogenic organismMicrobiologyBacteriaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Direct rapid identification of microorganisms from positive blood culture bottles would decrease the time to targeted antimicrobial therapy and improve patient care. The Bruker Sepsityper kit is commercially available but has multiple steps and takes about 40 minutes to process specimens. We evaluated an in-house method to rapidly identify bacteria directly from positive blood culture medium using the Bruker MALDI Biotyper and serum separator tubes (SST). Methods. Positive blood culture isolates from 165 patients were included in our study. When a resin-based BacT/Alert (bioMérieux) blood culture bottle was flagged positive, 5 mL of the broth was transferred to a 5 mL serum separator tube and centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 5 minutes. The supernatant was aspirated without disrupting the pellet of bacteria present at the surface of the polymeric gel. A sterile wooden stick was then used to spot the pellet on to the stainless steel target. The bacteria were then allowed to dry, then overlaid with 1 µL of α-cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid (HCCA) matrix, and analyzed using the MALDI-TOF mass spectrometer (MALDI Biotyper with FlexControl software; Bruker Daltonics). The positive blood culture bottle was also routinely processed to identify the bacteria by conventional methods. Results. Of the 165 specimens tested by the SST method, 124 were Gram-negative, 34 were Gram positive, and 7 were anaerobes. Overall, correct identification to the genus and species levels was obtained in 156 of 165 (95%) and 153 of 165 (92.7%) blood culture broths, respectively. Gram-negative organisms were identified correctly to the genus level in 120 of 124 (96.7%) and to the species level in 118 of 124 (95.1%) specimens. Gram positive organisms were identified correctly to the genus level in 30 of 34 (88.2%) and to the species level in 29 of 34 (85.2%) specimens. Six of the 7 (85.7%) anaerobes tested were identified correctly to the genus and species levels. The use of the SST method for direct identification of organisms was simple and had an average turnaround time of 15 minutes. Conclusion. Utilizing MALDI-TOF MS with the SST method is a promising tool for the direct identification of organisms from positive blood culture bottles. Disclosures. All authors: No reported disclosures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207