Fig 1.
Of the 68 patient samples, 25 had Sepsityper analysis performed as part of routine diagnostics.
Fig 2.
Overview of clinical microbiology SOP.
Fig 3.
Comparison of the FcMBL and Sepsityper® protocols.
Time to identification is ~7 minutes for the full Sepsityper® workflow compared to ~9 minutes for the FcMBL protocol.
Fig 4.
MALDI-TOF MS spectra of bacteria and yeast captured and eluted from FcMBL-processed beads.
Bruker Biotyper log scores in bold.
Table 1.
MALDI-TOF MS identification of paediatric samples using FcMBL beads.
Seven patients had both an anaerobic and aerobic bottle processed if available, accounting for the higher number of FcMBL positive samples seen for some species.
Table 2.
Bruker Biotyper log score comparison of the Sepsityper® and FcMBL methods for the detection of pathogens in positive clinical blood culture samples.
Bold Log scores indicate the higher score of the two methods.
Fig 5.
Extreme enrichment of E. coli from spiked blood samples compared to centrifuged samples.
E. coli specific peaks are found in all concentrations using the FcMBL method. The limit of detection for the centrifuged samples was found to be at 106 CFU/ml.
Table 3.
Comparison of Bruker Biotyper log scores between the Sepsityper® and FcMBL rapid identification methods for fungemia.
Log scores highlighted in red indicate scores below identification confidence. Bold log scores indicate the higher score of the two methods.
Fig 6.
Heatmap of spectral similarities with dendrogram clustering analysis for FcMBL candida mass spectra (2,000–20,000m/z).
Fig 7.
Heatmap of spectral similarities with dendrogram clustering analysis for FcMBL candida mass spectra (2,500–7,400m/z).