ArticlePloS one2015
A Side by Side Comparison of Bruker Biotyper and VITEK MS: Utility of MALDI-TOF MS Technology for Microorganism Identification in a Public Health Reference Laboratory.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
83 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Accuracy of Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry for Identification of Mycobacteria: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2018Pooled it
- Comparison of Bruker Biotyper Sirius, VITEK MS PRIME, and ASTA MicroIDSys MALDI-TOF MS Systems forAnnals of laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Linking land use to the likely origins of third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales in freshwater.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the VITEKEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Prevalence and genetic characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Commercial aquaculture farms in Egypt.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative analysis of milk bacteria by two MALDI-MS systems.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Experimental study on factors influencing low identification rates and spectral quality ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Induced Chronic Rhinosinusitis in Rats Leads to Secondary Changes in Sinonasal Microbiota.Laryngoscope investigative otolaryngology · 2025Article
- Rapid Multi-Omics for Bacterial Identification Using Flow Injection-Ion Mobility-Mass Spectrometry.Analytical chemistry · 2025Article
- Evaluation of two MALDI-TOF MS systems and extraction methods for identification of filamentous fungi recovered from clinical specimens.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Diagnostic Stewardship in Clinical Microbiology: An Indispensable Component of Patient Care.Infectious disorders drug targets · 2025Review
- Resolution of MALDI-TOF compared to whole genome sequencing for identification ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- New Campylobacter Lineages in New Zealand Freshwater: Pathogenesis and Public Health Implications.Environmental microbiology · 2024Article
- Diagnostic performance of an automated robot for MALDI target preparation in microbial identification.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Using matrix assisted laser desorption ionisation mass spectrometry combined with machine learning for vaccine authenticity screening.NPJ vaccines · 2024Article
- Direct sub-atmospheric pressure ionization mass spectrometry: Evaporation/sublimation-driven ionization is amazing, fundamentally, and practically.Journal of mass spectrometry : JMS · 2024Review
- The usefulness of the MALDI-TOF MS technique in the determination of dairy samples' microbial composition: comparison of the new EXS 2600 system with MALDI Biotyper platform.Archives of microbiology · 2024Article
23 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has emerged as a rapid, highly accurate, and cost-effective method for routine identification of a wide range of microorganisms. We carried out a side by side comparative evaluation of the performance of Bruker Biotyper versus VITEK MS for identification of a large and diverse collection of microorganisms. Most difficult and/or unusual microorganisms, as well as commonly encountered microorganisms were selected, including Gram-positive and negative bacteria, mycobacteria, actinomycetes, yeasts and filamentous fungi. Six hundred forty two strains representing 159 genera and 441 species from clinical specimens previously identified at the Laboratoire de santé publique du Québec (LSPQ) by reference methods were retrospectively chosen for the study. They included 254 Gram-positive bacteria, 167 Gram-negative bacteria, 109 mycobacteria and aerobic actinomycetes and 112 yeasts and moulds. MALDI-TOF MS analyses were performed on both systems according to the manufacturer's instructions. Of the 642 strains tested, the name of the genus and / or species of 572 strains were referenced in the Bruker database while 406 were present in the VITEK MS IVD database. The Biotyper correctly identified 494 (86.4%) of the strains, while the VITEK MS correctly identified 362 (92.3%) of the strains (excluding 14 mycobacteria that were not tested). Of the 70 strains not present in the Bruker database at the species level, the Biotyper correctly identified 10 (14.3%) to the genus level and 2 (2.9%) to the complex/group level. For 52 (74.2%) strains, we obtained no identification, and an incorrect identification was given for 6 (8.6%) strains. Of the 178 strains not present in the VITEK MS IVD database at the species level (excluding 71 untested mycobacteria and actinomycetes), the VITEK MS correctly identified 12 (6.8%) of the strains each to the genus and to the complex/group level. For 97 (54.5%) strains, no identification was given and for 69 (38.7%) strains, an incorrect identification was obtained. Our study demonstrates that both systems gave a high level (above 85%) of correct identification for a wide range of microorganisms. However, VITEK MS gave more misidentification when the microorganism analysed was not present in the database, compared to Bruker Biotyper. This should be taken into account when this technology is used alone for microorganism identification in a public health laboratory, where isolates received are often difficult to identify and/or unusual microorganisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.