Table 1 Clinical isolates and identification results from MicroScan, VITEK2, and Crystal GP
Clinical Isolates (using MicroSeq 500) | No of isolates | Correct Identificationa | Low-level Discriminationb | Misidentificationc | Nonidentificationd |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Â | MicroScan | |||
S. capitis | 16 | 13 (81.3%) | - | 3 (18.8%) | - |
S. caprae | 4 | - | - | 4 (100.0%) | - |
S. cohnii | 3 | 1 (33.3%) | 1 (33.3%) | 1 (33.3%) | - |
S. epidermidis | 53 | 51 (96.2%) | - | 2 (3.8%) | - |
S. haemolyticus | 4 | 3 (75.0%) | 1 (25.0%) | - | - |
S. hominis | 25 | 23 (92.0%) | 2 (8.0%) | - | - |
S. lugdunensis | 6 | 2 (33.3%) | 1 (16.7%) | 3 (50.0%) | - |
S. saprophyticus | 1 | 1 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. simulans | 2 | 2 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. warneri | 6 | 3 (50.0%) | 3 (50.0%) | - | - |
Subtotal | 120 | 99 (82.5%) | 8 (6.7%) | 13 (10.8%) | - |
| Â | Â | VITEK 2 | |||
S. capitis | 16 | 16 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. caprae | 4 | 3 (75.0%) | - | 1 (25.0%) | - |
S. cohnii | 3 | 3 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. epidermidis | 53 | 47 (88.7%) | 6 (11.3%) | - | - |
S. haemolyticus | 4 | 4 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. hominis | 25 | 22 (88.0%) | 1 (4.0%) | 2 (8.0%) | - |
S. lugdunensis | 6 | 5 (83.3%) | 1 (16.7%) | - | - |
S. saprophyticus | 1 | 1 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. simulans | 2 | 1 (50.0%) | 1 (50.0%) | - | - |
S. warneri | 6 | 3 (50.0%) | - | 3 (50.0%) | - |
Subtotal | 120 | 105 (87.5%) | 9 (7.5%) | 6 (5.0%) | - |
| Â | Â | Crystal GP | |||
S. capitis | 16 | 13 (81.3%) | - | 3 (18.8%) | - |
S. caprae | 4 | - | - | 4 (100.0%) | - |
S. cohnii | 3 | 3 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. epidermidis | 53 | 49 (92.5%) | - | 3 (5.7%) | 1 (1.9%) |
S. haemolyticus | 4 | 4 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. hominis | 25 | 1 (4.0%) | - | 15 (60.0%) | 9 (36.0%) |
S. lugdunensis | 6 | 2 (33.3%) | - | 3 (50.0%) | 1 (16.7%) |
S. saprophyticus | 1 | 1 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. simulans | 2 | 2 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
S. warneri | 6 | 6 (100.0%) | - | - | - |
Subtotal | 120 | 81 (67.5%) | - | 28 (23.3%) | 11 (9.2%) |