This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mittman, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Whittier, S.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Mittman, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Whittier, S.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2009, p. 3557-3561, Vol. 47, No. 11
0095-1137/09/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/JCM.01137-09
Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Comparison of BD Phoenix to Vitek 2, MicroScan MICroSTREP, and Etest for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Streptococcus pneumoniae{triangledown}

Scott A. Mittman,1 Richard C. Huard,1,2 Phyllis Della-Latta,1,2 and Susan Whittier1,2*

Clinical Microbiology Service,1 Department of Pathology, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, New York 100322

Received 10 June 2009/ Returned for modification 7 August 2009/ Accepted 1 September 2009

The performance of the BD Phoenix Automated Microbiology System (BD Diagnostic Systems) was compared to those of the Vitek 2 (bioMérieux), the MicroScan MICroSTREP plus (Siemens), and Etest (bioMérieux) for antibiotic susceptibility tests (AST) of 311 clinical isolates of Streptococcus pneumoniae. The overall essential agreement (EA) between each test system and the reference microdilution broth reference method for S. pneumoniae AST results was >95%. For Phoenix, the EAs of individual antimicrobial agents ranged from 90.4% (clindamycin) to 100% (vancomycin and gatifloxacin). The categorical agreements (CA) of Phoenix, Vitek 2, MicroScan, and Etest for penicillin were 95.5%, 94.2%, 98.7%, and 97.7%, respectively. The overall CA for Phoenix was 99.3% (1 very major error [VME] and 29 minor errors [mEs]), that for Vitek 2 was 98.8% (7 VMEs and 28 mEs), and those for MicroScan and Etest were 99.5% each (19 and 13 mEs, respectively). The average times to results for Phoenix, Vitek 2, and the manual methods were 12.1 h, 9.8 h, and 24 h, respectively. From these data, the Phoenix AST results demonstrated a high degree of agreement with all systems evaluated, although fewer VMEs were observed with the Phoenix than with the Vitek 2. Overall, both automated systems provided reliable AST results for the S. pneumoniae-antibiotic combinations in half the time required for the manual methods, rendering them more suitable for the demands of expedited reporting in the clinical setting.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: CHC3-326, Clinical Microbiology Service, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center, 622 West 168th St., New York, NY 10032. Phone: (212) 305-6237. Fax: (212) 305-8971. E-mail: whittie{at}nyp.org

{triangledown} Published ahead of print on 9 September 2009.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, November 2009, p. 3557-3561, Vol. 47, No. 11
0095-1137/09/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/JCM.01137-09
Copyright © 2009, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.





Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»