Accurate identification of S. pneumoniae using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry, still a challenge for clinical laboratories?

  • Eric FarfourEmail author
  • Nicolas Degand
  • Anaëlle Muggeo
  • Patricia Marcelino
  • Marc Vasse
  • Thomas Guillard
Letter to the Editor

To the Editor

Due to its high reliability and convenience for micro-organism identification, MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry is now implemented in a large number of clinical laboratories. However, the Microflex LT and the Compass software (Bruker Daltonics, Bremen, Germany) lack of performance for the accurate identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae, S. pseudopneumoniae, and other Streptococci within the mitis/oralis group (SMOG). Several reports have proposed to solve this issue by implementing the supplier database with additional spectra [1], performing visual analysis of spectra [2, 3], or using algorithms [1, 4]. In comparison to routine use of MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry, most of these strategies are time-consuming, uneasy to perform, or still insufficiently accurate. Furthermore, most reports include a few number of clinical strains and most often no S. pseudopneumoniae.Moreover, most of the strains are frozen collection strains that do not reflect routine use conditions....


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest


  1. 1.
    Harju I, Lange C, Kostrzewa M, Maier T, Rantakokko-Jalava K, Haanperä M. Improved differentiation of Streptococcus pneumoniae and other S. mitis group Streptococci by MALDI Biotyper using an improved MALDI Biotyper database content and a novel result interpretation algorithm. J Clin Microbiol. [Internet] 2017 1 [cited 2019 30];55:914–22. Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marín M, Cercenado E, Sánchez-Carrillo C, Ruiz A, González ÁG, Rodríguez-Sánchez B, et al. Accurate differentiation of Streptococcus pneumoniae from other species within the Streptococcus mitis group by peak analysis using MALDI-TOF MS. Front Microbiol. [Internet] 2017 [cited 2019 30];8.
  3. 3.
    Slotved H-C, Facklam RR, Fuursted K. Assessment of a novel bile solubility test and MALDI-TOF for the differentiation of Streptococcus pneumoniae from other mitis group streptococci. Sci Rep. [Internet] 2017 [cited 2019 30];7:7167.
  4. 4.
    Trochu E, Cardot E, Cahen P, Mathonnet D, Donato N, Vasse M et al (2017) Validation of the identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae and oral streptococci by MALDI-TOF Microflex-LT. Ann Biol Clin (Paris) 75. PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Arbique JC, Poyart C, Trieu-Cuot P, Quesne G, Carvalho Mda GS, Steigerwalt AG, et al. Accuracy of phenotypic and genotypic testing for identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae and description of Streptococcus pseudopneumoniae sp. nov. J Clin Microbiol. [Internet] 2004 [cited 2019 30];42:4686–96. Scholar
  6. 6.
    van Prehn J, van Veen SQ, Schelfaut JJG, Wessels E. MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry for differentiation between Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pseudopneumoniae. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. [Internet] 2016 1 [cited 2019 30];85:9–11. Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wessels E, Schelfaut JJG, Bernards AT, Claas ECJ. Evaluation of several biochemical and molecular techniques for identification of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Streptococcus pseudopneumoniae and their detection in respiratory samples. J Clin Microbiol [Internet] 2012 [cited 2019 30];50:1171–7. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Service de Biologie CliniqueHôpital FochSuresnesFrance
  2. 2.Laboratoire de bactériologie, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de NiceHôpital de l’ArchetNiceFrance
  3. 3.Inserm UMR-S 1250 P3Cell, SFR CAP-SantéUniversité de Reims-Champagne-ArdenneReimsFrance
  4. 4.Laboratoire de Bactériologie-Virologie-Hygiène Hospitalière-Parasitologie-Mycologie, CHU ReimsHôpital Robert DebréReimsFrance

Personalised recommendations