Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Bacteriemia is a major cause of morbidity and mortality among hospitalized patients worldwide. Early identification of microorganisms from blood culture can lead to improvement of treatment and outcomes.
METHODS: The study was divided into two phases. The first phase when a comparison of the methods was made to check the concordance between them, using as a reference the standard method implemented in the laboratory. In a second phase, both methods are combined. We used the rapid identification method and when it could not identify we used the standard method. The microorganisms that were not identified by either of the two methods were identified from colony at 24 hours.
RESULTS: A total of 589 microbial positive blood cultures have been included in the present study. With the rapid method we obtained 96% and 88% identification results for Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) and Gram-positive cocci (GPC) respectively. In this study we observed that the combination of the rapid and standard method achieved identifications of 98% and 97% for GNB and GPC respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The data analysed shows that both methods combined perform better than individually. We achieved an optimization of the identification of microorganisms directly from positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF. This combination identified 98% of the microorganisms in between ten minutes to one hour and a half since the blood culture flagged positive.
METHODS: The study was divided into two phases. The first phase when a comparison of the methods was made to check the concordance between them, using as a reference the standard method implemented in the laboratory. In a second phase, both methods are combined. We used the rapid identification method and when it could not identify we used the standard method. The microorganisms that were not identified by either of the two methods were identified from colony at 24 hours.
RESULTS: A total of 589 microbial positive blood cultures have been included in the present study. With the rapid method we obtained 96% and 88% identification results for Gram-negative bacilli (GNB) and Gram-positive cocci (GPC) respectively. In this study we observed that the combination of the rapid and standard method achieved identifications of 98% and 97% for GNB and GPC respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: The data analysed shows that both methods combined perform better than individually. We achieved an optimization of the identification of microorganisms directly from positive blood cultures by MALDI-TOF. This combination identified 98% of the microorganisms in between ten minutes to one hour and a half since the blood culture flagged positive.
摘要：
目的：细菌血症是全球住院患者发病和死亡的主要原因。从血液培养物中早期识别微生物可以导致治疗和结果的改善。
方法：本研究分为两个阶段。第一阶段是比较方法以检查它们之间的一致性，使用实验室实施的标准方法作为参考。在第二阶段,两种方法相结合。我们使用了快速鉴定方法，当无法鉴定时，我们使用了标准方法。在24小时从菌落中鉴定未通过两种方法中的任一种方法鉴定的微生物。
结果：本研究共纳入589个微生物阳性血培养物。通过快速方法，我们分别获得了96％和88％的革兰氏阴性杆菌（GNB）和革兰氏阳性球菌（GPC）鉴定结果。在这项研究中，我们观察到快速和标准方法的组合分别实现了GNB和GPC的98％和97％的鉴定。
结论：分析的数据显示，两种方法联合使用比单独使用效果更好。我们实现了通过MALDI-TOF直接从阳性血液培养物中鉴定微生物的优化。自血液培养标记为阳性以来，该组合在十分钟至一个半小时内鉴定出98％的微生物。
方法：本研究分为两个阶段。第一阶段是比较方法以检查它们之间的一致性，使用实验室实施的标准方法作为参考。在第二阶段,两种方法相结合。我们使用了快速鉴定方法，当无法鉴定时，我们使用了标准方法。在24小时从菌落中鉴定未通过两种方法中的任一种方法鉴定的微生物。
结果：本研究共纳入589个微生物阳性血培养物。通过快速方法，我们分别获得了96％和88％的革兰氏阴性杆菌（GNB）和革兰氏阳性球菌（GPC）鉴定结果。在这项研究中，我们观察到快速和标准方法的组合分别实现了GNB和GPC的98％和97％的鉴定。
结论：分析的数据显示，两种方法联合使用比单独使用效果更好。我们实现了通过MALDI-TOF直接从阳性血液培养物中鉴定微生物的优化。自血液培养标记为阳性以来，该组合在十分钟至一个半小时内鉴定出98％的微生物。
