Fig 1.
Performance of both platforms on the total of microorganisms tested.
Percentage of identification at the species level, genus and not identified by both instruments.
Table 1.
Identification results in Vitek MS and Microflex LT for Gram-Positive Bacillus species.
Table 2.
Identification results in Vitek MS and Microflex LT for coryneiform species.
Table 3.
Identification results in Vitek MS and Microflex LT for Gram-Positive Cocci species.
Table 4.
Identification results in Vitek MS and Microflex LT for anaerobes species.
Table 5.
Identification results in Vitek MS and Microflex LT for the Gram-Negative Bacilli clinically relevants.
Table 6.
Identification results in Vitek MS and Microflex LT for the most frequent clinically-relevant Actinomycetal species.
Table 7.
Identification results in Vitek MS and Microflex LT compared with the reference identification for fastidious microorganisms species.
Table 8.
Comparison of technical and practical aspects between both platforms.