This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Grasmick, A E Articles by Bruckner, D A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Grasmick, A E Articles by Bruckner, D A

Clinical comparison of the AutoMicrobic system gram-positive identification card, API Staph-Ident, and conventional methods in the identification of coagulase-negative Staphylococcus spp.

ABSTRACT

In an effort to rapidly identify coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS), a clinical comparison was conducted with the AutoMicrobic system Gram-Positive Identification Card (GPI) (Vitek Systems, Inc.), the API Staph-Ident (Analytab Products), and the conventional methods of W. E. Kloos and K. H. Schleifer (W. E. Kloos and K. H. Schleifer, J. Clin. Microbiol. 1:82-88, 1975). CNS isolates tested included 157 from blood and 33 from urine in pure culture at greater than 10(5) CFU/ml. S. epidermidis accounted for 79.6 and 60.6% of the isolates from blood and urine, respectively. S. saprophyticus was the next most frequent urine isolate (27.4%). Other CNS species were isolated from blood and urine specimens with frequencies of less than 5%. Overall, the GPI correctly identified 158 (83.2%) of the 190 CNS, whereas the Staph-Ident identified 124 (65.3%) without further testing. This resulted in the GPI and Staph-Ident correctly identifying 95.9 and 74.5% of the S. epidermidis and 100 and 33% of the S. saprophyticus, respectively. The GPI misidentified 8 (47%) of the S. hominis and S. warneri isolates as S. saprophyticus, indicating the need for novobiocin testing. These data suggest that the GPI is a more definitive method for the rapid identification of S. epidermidis than the Staph-Ident and that both systems require additional testing to identify S. saprophyticus.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Yugueros, J., Temprano, A., Sanchez, M., Luengo, J. M., Naharro, G. (2001). Identification of Staphylococcus spp. by PCR-Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism of gap Gene. J. Clin. Microbiol. 39: 3693-3695 [Abstract] [Full Text]