Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 2000, p. 1127-1130, Vol. 38, No. 3
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Evaluation of autoSCAN-W/A and the Vitek GNI+ AutoMicrobic System
for Identification of Non-Glucose-Fermenting Gram-Negative
Bacilli
Ling Ling
Sung,1
Dine Ie
Yang,1,2,*
Chia Chien
Hung,1 and
Hsin Tsung
Ho1
Departments of
Laboratory1 and Medical
Research,2 MacKay Memorial Hospital, Taipei,
Taiwan, Republic of China
Received 26 May 1999/Returned for modification 5 November
1999/Accepted 20 December 1999
 |
ABSTRACT |
The autoSCAN-W/A (W/A; Dade Behring Microscan Inc., West
Sacramento, Calif.) and Vitek AutoMicrobic System (Vitek AMS;
bioMérieux Vitek Systems, Inc., Hazelwood, Mo.) are both fully
automated microbiology systems. We evaluated the accuracy of these two
systems in identifying nonglucose-fermenting gram-negative bacilli. We used the W/A with conventional-panel Neg Combo type 12 and Vitek GNI+
identification systems. A total of 301 isolates from 25 different species were tested. Of these, 299 isolates were identified in the
databases of both systems. The conventional biochemical methods were
used for reference. The W/A correctly identified 215 isolates (71.4%)
to the species level at initial testing with a high probability of
85%. The Vitek GNI+ correctly identified 216 isolates (71.8%) to
the species level at initial testing with a high probability of
90%.
After additional testing that was recommended by the manufacturer's
protocol, the correct identifications of the W/A and Vitek GNI+
improved to 96.0 and 92.3%, respectively. The major misidentified
species were Sphingomonas paucimobilis and
Agrobacterium radiobacter in the W/A system and
Acinetobacter lwoffii, Chryseobacterium indologenes, and Comamonas acidovorans in the Vitek
GNI+ system. The error rates were 4.0 and 7.6%, respectively. The
overall accuracy for both systems was above 90% if the supplemental
tests were applied. There was no significant difference in accuracy
(P > 0.05) between the two systems.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Non-glucose-fermenting
gram-negative bacilli are widely distributed in nature
and are found in soil, water, and the general environment. They are
opportunistic pathogens and are recovered from a variety of
clinical specimens. Up to 20% of all gram-negative bacilli
isolated in our hospital are non-glucose-fermenting bacilli. These
organisms may cause community- and hospital-acquired infections either
by colonization or accidental introduction into the body, or both
(5). Some tend to be drug resistant (4);
hence, a rapid, accurate, and cost-effective means of identification is
required by laboratories (1, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10).
The identification of non-glucose-fermenting gram-negative bacilli by
conventional biochemical methods is technical and labor-intensive (6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11). Automated systems, such as the
autoSCAN-W/A (W/A) (Dade Behring MicroScan Inc., West Sacramento, Calif.) and the Vitek AutoMicrobic System (AMS) (bioMérieux
Vitek Systems Inc., Hazelwood, Mo.), provide fully automated
microbiological diagnostic capabilities. These two systems offer
greater standardization and convenience than the conventional
identification systems, and they also shorten hands-on time (6, 7,
10, 11). In this study, 301 nonglucose-fermenting
gram-negative bacilli were studied by two automatic systems, the W/A,
with conventional-panel Neg Combo type 12, and the Vitek GNI+ AMS, and
the results were compared with those of conventional biochemical
methods for accuracy.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Isolates.
A total of 301 non-glucose-fermenting
gram-negative bacilli were collected from clinical specimens,
representing 20 genera and 25 species. All isolates were tested by both
the W/A conventional-panel Neg Combo type 12 and Vitek GNI+
identification systems. All isolates were stocked at
70°C and
subcultured three times on Trypticase soy agar with 5% sheep blood
(TSA II; Becton-Dickinson Microbiology System) at 35°C overnight
before being tested. Definitive identification of all isolates was
performed by conventional biochemical tests following the methodology
published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(12).
Identification system.
The W/A automatic system with
conventional-panel Neg Combo type 12 can identify
non-glucose-fermenting gram-negative bacilli in 15 to 48 h. The
oxidase test had been performed prior to inoculation on the
autoSCAN-W/A system. Its concentration was standardized by Prompt
Inoculation System-D, which contains the Prompt Inoculation wand with a
collar and the Prompt Inoculation bottle with 30 ml of aqueous PLURONIC
surfactants. Three to five isolated colonies were touched with the wand
tip. Then the collar was pulled off and the wand was placed in the
inoculation bottle. The bottle was shaken vigorously 8 to 10 times to
release the bacteria from the wand tip. The final concentration of the
bacterial suspension was 6.9 × 105 CFU/ml. The
standardized bacterial suspension was poured into a seed tray and
passed through to the panel well. The labeled inoculated panel was
inserted into the W/A incubation tower after oil was added to the
designated wells and was then read automatically by its computer with
version 22.01 software.
The automated Vitek AMS with its more recent GNI+ card can identify
non-glucose-fermenting gram-negative bacilli within 4 to 12 h. The
bacterial suspension in 0.45% saline was used to calibrate a Vitek
colorimeter between the blue and green scale ranges, indicating a
concentration of no less than 1.0 McFarland standard for identification
of non-glucose-fermenting gram-negative bacilli. The oxidase test had
also been performed prior to inoculation on the Vitek system. When the
bacterial suspension was standardized, the inoculation card was
automatically created in the filler model and then sealed with the
sealer plug model. The inoculation card was then transferred into the
incubator model and read automatically by its computer with version
5.01 software.
Definitions.
In our research, we defined the term "correct
at initial testing" to mean that the isolate was correctly identified
to the species level at initial testing with a high probability of
85% by the W/A or
90% by the Vitek GNI+. The term "correct
after additional testing" meant that additional testing recommended by the manufacturer's protocol was needed for correct identification when results were below the high probability. The term "error" meant that the isolate was misidentified by the system. All of the
tests were repeated if the results were not correct at the initial testing.
Statistical analysis.
The results were evaluated by
chi-square analysis, using a t test to arrive at a
P value.
 |
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
We tested 301 non-glucose-fermenting gram-negative bacilli
representing 20 genera and 25 species using the W/A and Vitek GNI+ automatic microbiology systems. Tables 1
and 2 show the results of the W/A and
Vitek GNI+ testing. A total of nine species were correct after
additional testing in both systems: Acinetobacter baumannii,
Alcaligenes xylosoxidans subsp. xylosoxidans,
Bordetella bronchiseptica, Chryseobacterium
meningosepticum, Ochrobactrum anthropi,
Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Ralstonia
pickettii, Shewanella putrefaciens, and
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Four species were misidentified in both systems: Chryseobacterium indologenes,
Pseudomonas fluorescens, Pseudomonas stutzeri,
and Sphingomonas paucimobilis.
In the W/A system, 215 isolates (71.4%) were correctly identified to
the species level at the initial testing, with a high probability of
85%. Another 74 isolates (24.6%) were identified correctly to the
species level after additional testing, with a low probability of
<85%, and the overall accuracy improved to 96.0%. In this study, we
used an updated W/A conventional-panel database with revised software.
Our results were better than those of Tenover et al. (11).
The Vitek GNI+ correctly identified 216 isolates (71.8%) to the
species level at initial testing, with a high probability of
90%.
Another 62 isolates (20.6%) were correct to the species level after
additional testing, with a low probability of <90%. For these 62 isolates, the results were 55 with "good confidence marginal
separation," 1 with a "questionable biopattern," and 6 "presumptive." The final accuracy was 92.3% for the Vitek GNI+. These results were similar to those reported by Bourbeau and Heiter (2), who had a 98.4% accuracy rate with 61 non-glucose-fermenting bacillus isolates.
In addition to Comamonas acidovorans for the W/A and
Acinetobacter lwoffii and C. meningosepticum for
the Vitek, Empedobacter brevis, P. fluorescens,
Pseudomonas putida, P. stutzeri, and
Sphingobacterium multivorum were the most common species
requiring additional testing in both systems.
Tables 3 and
4 show the errors in the W/A and Vitek
GNI+. Of the 12 errors in the W/A, 7 were misidentifications at the genus level, 3 were misidentifications at the species level, and 2 which were not in the database were interpreted as "very rare biotype." In this study, the most frequently misidentified species were S. paucimobilis and Agrobacterium
radiobacter. Four of the six isolates of S. paucimobilis were misidentified as Sphingobacterium spiritivorum (three isolates) due to a false-negative reaction for
maltose and as C. meningosepticum or C. indologenes (one isolate) due to a false-positive reaction for
sucrose. Two of four isolates of A. radiobacter were both
misidentified as Pseudomonas spp. due to a false-negative
esculin hydrolysis reaction. These two species represented 3.3% (10 of
301) of all isolates tested in the W/A system.
Of the 23 errors in the Vitek GNI+ system, 12 were misidentified at the
genus level and 4 were misidentified at the species level. The
remaining seven isolates were interpreted as "unidentified." The
most frequently misidentified species were A. lwoffii,
C. indologenes, and C. acidovorans. Bourbeau and
Heiter, O'Hara et al., and Pfaller et al. (2, 6, 7, 8)
pointed out the weaknesses of the Vitek GNI and Vitek GNI+ systems in
identifying A. lwoffii. For the GNI system, O'Hara et al.
(7) reported that one of the A. lwoffii isolates
was misidentified as Acinetobacter anitratus, and
Pfaller et al. (8) reported that three out of five isolates
of A. lwoffii were interpreted as "no identification." As for the GNI+ system, O'Hara et al. (6) reported one
isolate and Bourbeau and Heiter (2) reported one out of
three isolates were unable to be identified but were interpreted as no
growth or "no identification" by using the GNI+ card. In our study,
of the 10 isolates of A. lwoffii, two failed to grow in the
GNI+ card, with an "unidentified" result, and two were
misidentified due to false-positive citrate and/or urea reactions. The
remaining 6 isolates were correctly identified after additional
testing. Four of the 25 isolates of C. indologenes were
misidentified as Brevundimonas vesicularis (one isolate) due
to a false-negative polymyxin B reaction, as P. stutzeri (one isolate) due to a false-positive acetamide reaction,
and as C. meningosepticum (two isolates), one due to a
false-positive mannitol reaction and the other due to a
false-negative glucose oxidation reaction. Three of the 12 isolates of
C. acidovorans were misidentified. One was misidentified as
Alcaligenes faecalis due to a false-positive polymyxin B
reaction, and two were misidentified as Myroides odoratus
due to false-negative mannitol reactions. These three species
represented 15.6% (47 of 301) of all isolates tested in the Vitek GNI+ system.
In a study by O'Hara et al. (7), it took 34 min to enter
data, generate bar codes, gather materials, and set up and load 10 panels for the W/A system compared to 21 min in our study. It took 30 min to gather material, make suspensions, and set up, fill, seal, and
load 10 cards for the Vitek system, both in our study and in that by
O'Hara et al. (7).
In summary, although they are both highly automated, additional testing
was required for 24.6% of isolates with the W/A system and 20.6% for
the Vitek GNI+ system. The additional tests take another 24 or 48 h, the same as reported by O'Hara et al. (7). In this
study, both systems achieved an accuracy level above 90%. We concluded
that there was no significant difference (P > 0.05) between
these two systems.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Mel Cheng for technical support. We appreciate the
manufacturers' supplying the W/A panels and the Vitek GNI+ cards used
in this study.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of
Laboratory, MacKay Memorial Hospital, 92 Chung San N. Road, Section II, Taipei, Taiwan. Phone: 886-1-2-25433535, ext. 2230 and 2234. E-mail: diyang{at}ms2.mmh.org.tw.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Barenfanger, J.,
C. Drake, and G. Kacich.
1999.
Clinical and financial benefits of rapid bacterial identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
37:1415-1418[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Bourbeau, P. P., and B. J. Heiter.
1998.
Comparison of Vitek GNI+ cards for identification of gram-negative bacteria.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:2775-2777[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Doern, G. V.,
R. Vautour,
M. Gaudet, and B. Levy.
1994.
Clinical impact of rapid in vitro susceptibility testing and bacterial identification.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
32:1757-1762[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 4.
|
Fass, R. J., and J. Barnishan.
1980.
In vitro susceptibilities of nonfermentative gram-negative bacilli other than Pseudomonas aeruginosa to 32 antimicrobial agents.
Rev. Infect. Dis.
2:841-853[Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Horan, T.,
D. Culver,
W. Jarvis,
G. Emori,
S. Banerjee,
W. Martone, and C. Thornsberry.
1988.
Pathogens causing nosocomial infections: preliminary data from the National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance System.
Antimicrob. Newsl.
5:65-67.
|
| 6.
|
O'Hara, C. M.,
G. L. Westbrook, and J. M. Miller.
1997.
Evaluation of Vitek GNI+ and Becton Dickinson Microbiology Systems Crystal E/NF identification systems for identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and other gram-negative, glucose-fermenting and non-glucose-fermenting bacilli.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
35:3269-3273[Abstract].
|
| 7.
|
O'Hara, C. M.,
F. C. Tenover, and J. M. Miller.
1993.
Parallel comparison of accuracy of API 20E, Vitek GNI, MicroScan Walk/Away Rapid ID, and Becton Dickinson Cobas Micro ID-E/NF for identification of members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and common gram-negative non-glucose-fermenting bacilli.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
31:3165-3169[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Pfaller, M. A.,
D. Sahm,
C. O'Hara,
C. Ciaglia,
M. Yu,
N. Yamane,
G. Scharnweber, and D. Rhoden.
1991.
Comparison of the autoSCAN-W/A rapid bacterial identification system and the Vitek AutoMicrobic system for the identification of gram-negative bacilli.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
29:1422-1428[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Plorde, J. J.,
J. A. Gates,
L. G. Carlson, and F. C. Tenover.
1986.
Critical evaluation of the AutoMicrobic System Gram-Negative Identification Card for identification of glucose-nonfermenting gram-negative rods.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
23:251-257[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Robinson, A.,
Y. S. McCarter, and J. Tetreault.
1995.
Comparison of Crystal Enteric/Nonfermenter system, API 20E system, and Vitek AutoMicrobic system for identification of gram-negative bacilli.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
33:364-370[Abstract].
|
| 11.
|
Tenover, F. C.,
T. S. Mizuki, and L. G. Carlson.
1990.
Evaluation of autoSCAN-W/A Automated Microbiology System for the identification of non-glucose-fermenting gram-negative bacilli.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
28:1628-1634[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Weyant, R. S.,
C. W. Moss,
R. E. Weaver,
D. G. Hollis,
J. G. Jordan,
E. C. Cook, and M. I. Daneshvar.
1996.
Identification of unusual pathogenic gram-negative aerobic and facultatively anaerobic bacteria, 2nd ed.
The Williams & Wilkins Co., Baltimore, Md.
|
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 2000, p. 1127-1130, Vol. 38, No. 3
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
O'Hara, C. M.
(2005). Manual and Automated Instrumentation for Identification of Enterobacteriaceae and Other Aerobic Gram-Negative Bacilli. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
18: 147-162
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
O'Hara, C. M., Miller, J. M.
(2002). Ability of the MicroScan Rapid Gram-Negative ID Type 3 Panel To Identify Nonenteric Glucose-Fermenting and Nonfermenting Gram-Negative Bacilli. J. Clin. Microbiol.
40: 3750-3752
[Abstract]
[Full Text]