4.2 Article

Medically important Candida spp. identification: an era beyond traditional methods

Journal

TURKISH JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
Volume 52, Issue 3, Pages 834-840

Publisher

TUBITAK SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL TURKEY
DOI: 10.55730/1300-0144.5380

Keywords

Candida identification; MALDI-TOF MS; CHROMagar Candida; corn meal tween-80 agar; sequencing

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the performance of CMTA, CHROMagar Candida medium, and MALDI-TOF MS in Candida identification, and concluded that MALDI-TOF MS is the most accurate tool for clinically important Candida strains.
Background/aim: Candida infections are gaining more attention for the last few decades so diagnostic tools are very important for early diagnosis. Conventional identification of yeasts is time-consuming, molecular methods are more complicated and relatively expensive gold-standard methods. Matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) was put into the market due to its speed and high accuracy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of corn meal tween-80 agar (CMTA), CHROMagar Candida medium, and MALDI-TOF MS and to compare the obtained results with DNA sequencing. Materials and methods: The CHROMagar Candida medium, CMTA, and MALDI-TOF MS Biotyper System were used to test 416 isolates. The isolates with discrepant results by at least one of the three methods were subjected to sequence analysis. Results: The identification results of the 351 (%84.4) were compatible with all three methods. When compared to the sequencing results, the most accurate results were obtained by the MALDI-TOF MS, especially for rare Candida species. Conclusion: MALDI-TOF MS is found to be the most accurate identification tool for clinically important Candida strains. CMTA alone should not be used for the final identification of Candida species and the chromogenic medium should always be considered presumptive.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available