ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2023
Diagnostic test accuracy of an automated device for the MALDI target preparation for microbial identification.
Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Autof MS2600 vs. Biotyper Sirius MALDI-TOF MS: a head-to-head study for routine microbial identification in a university clinical microbiology laboratory.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026Article
- Total laboratory automation-based monitoring processes: setup and validation of an integrated internal quality control panel.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance of an automated robot for MALDI target preparation in microbial identification.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- The Impact of Laboratory Automation on the Time to Urine Microbiological Results: A Five-Year Retrospective Study.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- MALDI-TOF MS: A Reliable Tool in the Real Life of the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Evaluation of a Novel Benchtop Tool for Acceleration of Sample Preparation for MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2023Article
- Cell Proteomic Footprinting: Advances in the Quality of Cellular and Cell-Derived Cancer Vaccines.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Laboratory automation, informatics, and artificial intelligence: current and future perspectives in clinical microbiology.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of the Copan Colibrí™ against the manual preparation of the MALDI targets. We analyzed 416 (31 different species) non-duplicate strains covering the most important species identified in clinical routine. We also assessed the intra-strain repeatability between the comparable methods. We then analyzed the performance of this new method after implementation in routine on 12,253 aerobic bacterial isolates and yeasts, encompassing a total of 42 different species. Among the 416 strains analyzed, 6.3% (26/416) and 10.8% (45/416) had a score value < 2 when processed by the Colibri™ and manual method, respectively. Only 5.9% (9/152) of the Gram positive rods and cocci had a score values < 2 by the Colibri™ versus 20.4% (31/152) by the manual method. We confirmed that this relative superiority observed for the Colibri™ was due primarily in the use of the formic acid protocol. For the Gram-negative bacteria, the results of both methods were comparable; 6.6% (17/256) and 4.7% (12/256) had a score value < 2 by the Colibri™ and the manual method, respectively. After implementation in routine, the results according to the Biotyper score cut-off values were distributed as follows: < 1.70: 2.5% (304/12,253), 1.70-1.79: 1.9% (227/12,253), 1.80-1.89: 3.1% (377/12,253), 1.90-1.99: 6.7% (825/12,253), and ≥ 2: 85.9% (10,520/12,253). The Colibrí™ coupled to MALDI-TOF/MS revealed good performances and higher intra-strain repeatability as compared to the manual preparation of the MALDI targets.
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.