Advertisement

Medical Microbiology and Immunology

, Volume 175, Issue 5, pp 307–316 | Cite as

Rapid identification of yeasts by semi-automated and conventional methods

  • S. M. Hussain Qadri
  • D. J. Flournoy
  • S. G. M. Qadri
  • E. G. Ramirez
Article
  • 37 Downloads

Abtract

Five different methods for the identification of significant yeast from clinical specimens were compared for their reliability, rapidity and cost-effectiveness. Three commercial methods consisted of semi-automated Abbott's yeasts identification system using MS-2 (Abbott Laboratories, Diagnostic Division, Irving, Texas), API 20C (Analytab Products, Inc., Plainview, NY) and Uni-Yeast-Tek (Flow Labs, Inc., MacLean, VA). Two conventional methods included the modified dye-plur plate auxanographic and rapid tube assimilation method. The 242 coded clinical isolates used in this study included 20 species ofCandida, Cryptococcus, Saccharomyces Geotrichum, Rhodotorula, Torulopsis andTrichosporon. The identificaiton accuracies with all the systems ranges between 92.3% to 97.5%. Results were available with Abbott's MS-2 within 24 h, with rapid tube assimilation method in 6–48 h and in 72 h with other systems. Rapid tube assimilation and dye-pour-plate auxanographic methods were least expensive, with labour and material costing around $ 1.00 per identification, whereas the commercial system cost a little over $ 5.00.

Keywords

Identification System Conventional Method Clinical Isolate Clinical Specimen Rapid Identification 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Adams ED Jr, Cooper BHA (1974) Evaluation of a modified Wickerham medium for identifying medically important yeasts. Am J Med Technol 40:377–88PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bodey GP, Rodriguez V (1975) Infections in cancer patients on a protected environment-prophylactic antibiotic program. Am J Med 59:497–504CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bowman PI, Ahearn DG (1976) Evaluation of commercial systems for the identification of clinical yeast isolates. J Clin Microbiol 4:49–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buesching WJ, Kurek K, Roberts GD (1979) Evaluation of the modified API 20C system for identification of clinically important yeasts. J Clin Microbiol 9:565–569PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cooper BH, Silva-Hunter M (1985) Medically important yeasts. In: Lennette EH, Spaulding EH, Truant JP (Eds) Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 4th ed., Washington DC, Am Soc Microbiol, pp 526–541Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cooper BH, Prowant S, Alexander B, Brunson DH (1985) Collaborative evaluation of the Abbott yeast identification system. J Clin Microbiol 19:853–856Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hart PD, Russell EB Jr, Remington JS (1969) The compromised host and infection. II. Deep fungal infection. J Infect Dis 120:169–191PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hasyn JJ, Buckley HR (1982) Evaluation of the Automicrobic system for identification of yeasts. J Clin Microbiol 16:901–904PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hersh EM, Bodey GP, Niles GA, Freireich EJ (1965) Causes of death in acute leukemia. A ten-year study of 414 patients from 1954–1963. J Am Med Assoc 193:99–103Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Keihn TY, Edwards FF, Tom D, Lieberman G, Bernard EM, Armstrong D (1985) Evaluation of the Quantrum II yeast identification system. J Clin Microbiol 22:216–219PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Klainer AS, Beisel WR (1969) Opportunistic infection: a review. Am J Med Sci 258:431–456PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Land GA, Harrison BA, Hulme KL, Cooper BH, Byrd JC (1979) Evaluation of the new API 20C strip for yeast identification against a conventional method. J Clin Microbiol 10:357–364PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Land GA, Vinton EC, Adcock GB, Hopkins JM (1975) Improved auxanographic method for yeast assimilations: a comparison with other approaches. J Clin Microbiol 2:206–17PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McGowan JE Jr, Barnes MW, Finland M (1975) Bacteremia at Boston City Hospital. Occurrence and mortality during 12 selected years (1935–1972), with special reference to hospital acquired cases. J Infect Dis 132:316–335PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mennier-Carpentier F, Kiehn TE, Armstrong D (1981) Fungemia in the immunocompromised host. Am J Med 71:363–370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Miller RE, Lu L (1976) Evaluation of a multitest microtechnique for yeast identification. Am J Med Technol 42:238–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oblack DL, Rhodes JC, Martin WJ (1981) Clinical evaluation of the AutoMicrobic system yeast biochemical card for rapid identification of medically important yeasts. J Clin Microbiol 13:351–355PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Qadri SMH, Nichols CW (1978) Evaluation of a commercial multitest system for identification of yeasts. Am J Med Technol 44:368–372PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Qadri SMH, Nichols CW (1978) Tube carbohydrate assimilation method for the rapid identification of clinically significant yeasts. Med Microbiol Immunol 165:19–27CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Salkin IF, Schadow KH, Bankaitis LA, McGinnis MR, Kemna ME (1985) Evaluation of Abbott Quantum II yeast identification system. J Clin Microbiol 22:442–444PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stone HH, Kolb LD, Currie CA, Geheber CE, Cuzzell JZ (1974) Candida sepsis: pathogenesis and principles of treatment. Ann Surg 179:697–710PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Taschdjian CL, Kozinn PJ, Toni EF (1970) Opportunistic yeast infections, with special reference to dandidiasis. Ann NY Acad Sci 174:606–22PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Webb DC, Papageorge C, Hall CT (1971) Identification of yeasts, Center for Disease Control, Atlanta, GeorgiaGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weymann LH, Qadri SGM, Stager CE, Qadri SMH (1979) Evaluation of the dye pour plate auxanographic method for the rapid identification of clinically significant yeasts. Med Microbiol Immunol 167:11–20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wickerham LJ, Burton KA (1948) Carbon assimilation tests for the classification of yeasts. J Bact 56:363–371Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. M. Hussain Qadri
    • 1
  • D. J. Flournoy
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. G. M. Qadri
    • 3
  • E. G. Ramirez
    • 3
  1. 1.University of Oklahoma Health Sciences CenterOklahoma City
  2. 2.Veterans Administration Medical CenterOklahoma CityUSA
  3. 3.Hospital Regional Zone Norte Petroleos MexicanosCd. Madero, Tam.Mexico

Personalised recommendations