Accurate identification of pathogenic species is important for early appropriate patient management, but growing diversity of infectious species/strains makes the identification of clinical yeasts increasingly difficult. Among conventional methods that are commercially available, the API ID32C, AuxaColor, and Vitek 2 systems are currently the most used systems in routine clinical microbiology. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate and to compare the accuracy of the three systems, in order to assess whether they are still of value for the species-level identification of medically relevant yeasts. After adopting rigorous selection criteria, we included 26 published studies involving Candida and non-Candida yeasts that were tested with the API ID32C (674 isolates), AuxaColor (1,740 isolates), and Vitek 2 (2,853 isolates) systems. The random-effects pooled identification ratios at the species level were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.95) for the API ID32C system, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.93) for the AuxaColor system, and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.96) for the Vitek 2 system (P for heterogeneity, 0.255). Overall, the accuracy of studies using phenotypic analysis-based comparison methods was comparable to that of studies using molecular analysis-based comparison methods. Subanalysis of studies conducted on Candida yeasts showed that the Vitek 2 system was significantly more accurate (pooled ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.85 to 0.99]) than the API ID32C system (pooled ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.99]) and the AuxaColor system (pooled ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.84]) with respect to uncommon species (P for heterogeneity, <0.05). Subanalysis of studies conducted on non-Candida yeasts (i.e., Cryptococcus, Rhodotorula, Saccharomyces, and Trichosporon) revealed pooled identification accuracies of ≥98% for the Vitek 2, API ID32C (excluding Cryptococcus), and AuxaColor (only Rhodotorula) systems, with significant low or null levels of heterogeneity (P > 0.05). Nonetheless, clinical microbiologists should reconsider the usefulness of these systems, particularly in light of new diagnostic tools such as matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry, which allow for considerably shortened turnaround times and/or avoid the requirement for additional tests for species identity confirmation.

Posteraro, B., Efremov, L., Leoncini, E., Amore, R., Posteraro, P., Ricciardi, G., Sanguinetti, M., Are the Conventional Commercial Yeast Identification Methods Still Helpful in the Era of New Clinical Microbiology Diagnostics? A Meta-Analysis of Their Accuracy, <<JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY>>, 2015; 53 (8): 2439-2450. [doi:10.1128/JCM.00802-15] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/69051]

Are the Conventional Commercial Yeast Identification Methods Still Helpful in the Era of New Clinical Microbiology Diagnostics? A Meta-Analysis of Their Accuracy

Posteraro, Brunella;Leoncini, Emanuele;Ricciardi, Gualtiero;Sanguinetti, Maurizio
2015

Abstract

Accurate identification of pathogenic species is important for early appropriate patient management, but growing diversity of infectious species/strains makes the identification of clinical yeasts increasingly difficult. Among conventional methods that are commercially available, the API ID32C, AuxaColor, and Vitek 2 systems are currently the most used systems in routine clinical microbiology. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate and to compare the accuracy of the three systems, in order to assess whether they are still of value for the species-level identification of medically relevant yeasts. After adopting rigorous selection criteria, we included 26 published studies involving Candida and non-Candida yeasts that were tested with the API ID32C (674 isolates), AuxaColor (1,740 isolates), and Vitek 2 (2,853 isolates) systems. The random-effects pooled identification ratios at the species level were 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 0.95) for the API ID32C system, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83 to 0.93) for the AuxaColor system, and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89 to 0.96) for the Vitek 2 system (P for heterogeneity, 0.255). Overall, the accuracy of studies using phenotypic analysis-based comparison methods was comparable to that of studies using molecular analysis-based comparison methods. Subanalysis of studies conducted on Candida yeasts showed that the Vitek 2 system was significantly more accurate (pooled ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.85 to 0.99]) than the API ID32C system (pooled ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.61 to 0.99]) and the AuxaColor system (pooled ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.84]) with respect to uncommon species (P for heterogeneity, <0.05). Subanalysis of studies conducted on non-Candida yeasts (i.e., Cryptococcus, Rhodotorula, Saccharomyces, and Trichosporon) revealed pooled identification accuracies of ≥98% for the Vitek 2, API ID32C (excluding Cryptococcus), and AuxaColor (only Rhodotorula) systems, with significant low or null levels of heterogeneity (P > 0.05). Nonetheless, clinical microbiologists should reconsider the usefulness of these systems, particularly in light of new diagnostic tools such as matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry, which allow for considerably shortened turnaround times and/or avoid the requirement for additional tests for species identity confirmation.
Inglese
Posteraro, B., Efremov, L., Leoncini, E., Amore, R., Posteraro, P., Ricciardi, G., Sanguinetti, M., Are the Conventional Commercial Yeast Identification Methods Still Helpful in the Era of New Clinical Microbiology Diagnostics? A Meta-Analysis of Their Accuracy, <>, 2015; 53 (8): 2439-2450. [doi:10.1128/JCM.00802-15] [http://hdl.handle.net/10807/69051]
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/10807/69051
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 17
  • Scopus 40
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 38
social impact