See the results from the clinical comparative study that is part of publication of Hrabak, J., et. al., (in press)
|1. Study (7 Days, 65 Dishes, 195 IDs)||2. Study (7 Days, 108 Dishes, 324 IDs)||Combined (14 Days, 173 Dishes, 519 IDs)|
|MALDI target preparation method||Average MALDI ID Score||MALDI ID Error (%)||Average MALDI ID Score||MALDI ID Error (%)||Average MALDI ID Score||MALDI ID Error (%)|
|Direct Dry Deposition||2,07||21%||2,14||15%||2,10||18%|
|Manual Wet Deposition||2,19||11%||2,19||8%||2,19||10%|
|Robotic Wet Deposition||2,18||20%||2,21||12%||2,19||16%|
Two independent one-week studies were performed to directly compare four different MALDI target preparation processes.
Selected fresh Petri dishes from clinical laboratory were used every day for advanced comparison study.
Similar colonies in three replicates were taken from each of the Petri dishes and for each of the four preparation procedures.
Compared procedures were manual Direct Dry Deposition, Semi-extraction, manual Wet Deposition and robotic Wet Deposition.
Percentage of MALDI results with “No peaks” or “No identification…” were calculated for the table and then excluded.
Average ID score from Bruker MALDI Biotyper was calculated for each of the identified bacteria and used preparation procedures.