ArticleInfection and drug resistance2023
Comparison of Autof Ms1000 and EXS3000 MALDI-TOF MS Platforms for Routine Identification of Microorganisms.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 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
- Comparative analysis of milk bacteria by two MALDI-MS systems.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Diversity, Distribution, and Phenotypic Characterization of Cultivable Wild Yeasts Isolated from Natural Forest.F1000Research · 2025Article
- Article
- Molecular Prevalence and Geographical Variations of Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae ST15 Isolates in a Tertiary Hospital in Ningbo, China.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Article
- 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
- Evaluation of Autof MS2600 and MBT Smart MALDI-TOF MS Systems for Routine Identification of Clinical Bacteria and Yeasts.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- MALDI-TOF MS: A Reliable Tool in the Real Life of the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Antibiotic Resistance and Epidemiology ofInfection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Rapid discrimination ofFrontiers in 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Matrix-assisted laser desorption-ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF) has recently been widely used in clinical microbiology laboratories, with the advantages of being reliable, rapid, and cost-effective. Here, we reported the performance of two MALDI-TOF MS instruments, EXS3000 (Zybio, China) and Autof ms1000 (Autobio, China), which are commonly used in clinical microbiology field. Methods: A total of 209 common clinical common isolates, including 70 gram-negative bacteria strains, 58 gram-positive bacteria strains, 33 yeast strains, 15 anaerobic bacteria strains, and 33 mold strains, and 19 mycobacterial strains were tested. All strains were identified by EXS3000 (Zybio, China) and Autof ms1000 (Autobio, China). Sequence analysis of 16S rRNA or ITS regions was used to verify all strains. Results: Current study found that species-level discrimination was found to be 191 (91.39%) and 190 (90.91%) by EXS3000 and Autof ms1000, respectively. Genus-level discrimination was 205 (98.09%) by the EXS3000 and 205 (98.09%) by the Autof ms1000, respectively. The correct results at species level of the EXS3000 were 91.43% (64/70) for gram-negative bacteria, 93.1% (54/58) for gram-positive cocci, 93.94% (31/33) for yeast, 100% (15/15) for anaerobes and 81.82% (27/33) for filamentous fungi. The correct results at species level of the Autof ms1000 were 92.86% (65/70) for gram-negative bacteria, 91.38% (53/58) for gram-positive cocci, 93.94% (31/33) for yeast, 100% (15/15) for anaerobes and 78.79% (26/33) for filamentous fungi. Conclusion: Although the results show that the EXS3000 and Autof ms1000 systems are equally good choices in terms of analytical efficiency for routine procedures, the test result of EXS3000 is slightly better than Autof ms1000. It's worth mentioning that the target plate of the EXS 3000 instrument is reusable, but the target plate of the Autof ms1000 is disposable, making the EXS3000 more effective in reducing costs.
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.