The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Evaluation of the VITEK 2 System for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Medically Relevant Gram-Positive Cocci
Open accessAbstract
A study was conducted to evaluate the new VITEK 2 system (bioMérieux) for identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing of gram-positive cocci. Clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus ( n = 100), coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) ( n = 100), Enterococcus spp. ( n = 89), Streptococcus agalactiae ( n = 29), and Streptococcus pneumoniae ( n = 66) were examined with the ID-GPC identification card and with the AST-P515 (for staphylococci), AST-P516 (for enterococci and S. agalactiae ) and AST-P506 (for pneumococci) susceptibility cards. The identification comparison methods were the API Staph for staphylococci and the API 20 Strep for streptococci and enterococci; for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, the agar dilution method according to the procedure of the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS) was used. The VITEK 2 system correctly identified to the species level (only one choice or after simple supplementary tests) 99% of S. aureus , 96.5% of S. agalactiae , 96.9% of S. pneumoniae , 92.7% of Enterococcus faecalis , 91.3% of Staphylococcus haemolyticus , and 88% of Staphylococcus epidermidis but was least able to identify Enterococcus faecium (71.4% correct). More than 90% of gram-positive cocci were identified within 3 h. According to the NCCLS breakpoints, antimicrobial susceptibility testing with the VITEK 2 system gave 96% correct category agreement, 0.82% very major errors, 0.17% major errors, and 2.7% minor errors. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing showed category agreement from 94 to 100% for S. aureus , from 90 to 100% for CNS, from 91 to 100% for enterococci, from 96 to 100% for S. agalactiae , and from 91 to 100% for S. pneumoniae . Microorganism-antibiotic combinations that gave very major errors were CNS-erythromycin, CNS-oxacillin, enterococci-teicoplanin, and enterococci-high-concentration gentamicin. Major errors were observed for CNS-oxacillin and S. agalactiae- tetracycline combinations. In conclusion the results of this study indicate that the VITEK 2 system represents an accurate and acceptable means for performing identification and antibiotic susceptibility tests with medically relevant gram-positive cocci.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Biofilms
Thi, M. T. T., Wibowo, D., & Rehm, B. H. A. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21228671 · Cited by 911
Fiebelkorn, K. R., Crawford, S. A., McElmeel, M. L., & Jorgensen, J. H. (2003) · Journal of Clinical Microbiology · doi:10.1128/jcm.41.10.4740-4744.2003 · Cited by 454
Blood culture-free ultra-rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing
Kim, T. H., Kang, J., Jang, H., Joo, H., Lee, G. Y., Kim, H., Cho, U., Bang, H., Jang, J., Han, S., et al. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07725-1 · Cited by 90
Metadata
- Authors
- Ligozzi, M., Bernini, C., Bonora, M. G., de Fatima, M., Zuliani, J., & Fontana, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2002-05
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1681-1686
- ISSN
- 0095-1137 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-660X
- OpenAlex
- W2096784236
- Cited by
- 265
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of the VITEK 2 System for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Medically Relevant Gram-Positive Cocci. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jcm.40.5.1681-1686.2002
- The paper
- Ligozzi, M., Bernini, C., Bonora, M. G., de Fatima, M., Zuliani, J., & Fontana, R. (2002). Evaluation of the VITEK 2 System for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Medically Relevant Gram-Positive Cocci. Journal of Clinical Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.40.5.1681-1686.2002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.