2012
DOI: 10.1099/jmm.0.041525-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Misidentification of Burkholderia pseudomallei as Burkholderia cepacia by the VITEK 2 system

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
29
0
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
29
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Moreover, B. thailandensis has been misidentified as B. pseudomallei by the API 20NE (35). Although, in our case, the automated Vitek 2 system at the outside hospital laboratory correctly identified the isolate as B. pseudomallei, the automated Vitek 2 system with a newer-generation identification card has been reported to perform variably, with an accuracy of between 63% and 81% (8), and to misidentify B. pseudomallei as B. cepacia (8). The Phoenix and MicroScan WalkAway 96 systems have reportedly performed poorly in the identification of B. pseudomallei (8).…”
Section: Laboratory Diagnosis and Rule-out Guidelinesmentioning
confidence: 72%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Moreover, B. thailandensis has been misidentified as B. pseudomallei by the API 20NE (35). Although, in our case, the automated Vitek 2 system at the outside hospital laboratory correctly identified the isolate as B. pseudomallei, the automated Vitek 2 system with a newer-generation identification card has been reported to perform variably, with an accuracy of between 63% and 81% (8), and to misidentify B. pseudomallei as B. cepacia (8). The Phoenix and MicroScan WalkAway 96 systems have reportedly performed poorly in the identification of B. pseudomallei (8).…”
Section: Laboratory Diagnosis and Rule-out Guidelinesmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…Although, in our case, the automated Vitek 2 system at the outside hospital laboratory correctly identified the isolate as B. pseudomallei, the automated Vitek 2 system with a newer-generation identification card has been reported to perform variably, with an accuracy of between 63% and 81% (8), and to misidentify B. pseudomallei as B. cepacia (8). The Phoenix and MicroScan WalkAway 96 systems have reportedly performed poorly in the identification of B. pseudomallei (8). With these potential identification errors, it is not advisable for a clinical laboratory to use any of these systems to rule out an isolate as B. pseudomallei.…”
Section: Laboratory Diagnosis and Rule-out Guidelinesmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thirty-seven (84%) isolates were ST881, with this ST forming the majority of samples from hospitals in the central region of Sarawak (i.e., Bintulu, Kapit, and Sibu). ST881 has been reported once previously, in a Chinese traveler returning from working in the Malaysian jungle (22). The sole isolate from the Miri hospital in northern Sarawak was ST271.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…A particular problem has been the misidentification of B. pseudomallei as Burkholderia cepacia by the Vitek 2 automated biochemical system (bioMérieux) (5)(6)(7)(8). B. cepacia belongs to a group of 17 phenotypically and genotypically similar species which form the B. cepacia complex, with B. cepacia specifically noted as an opportunistic pathogen infecting and causing progressive pulmonary deterioration in patients with cystic fibrosis (14,15).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%