Skip to main content
. 2016 Aug 5;15:45. doi: 10.1186/s12941-016-0158-9

Table 2.

Comparison of the results of identification of blood culture isolates obtained with the automated VITEK® 2 system, conventional phenotypic methods, and genotypic methods

Microorganism isolated (number) Automated identification Conventional methods Genotypic identification
Bacillus licheniformis (N = 2) 0 NP 2
Corynebacterium amycolatum (N = 3) 0 NP 3
Enterococcus faecalis (N = 8) 7 8 8
Staphylococcus epidermidis (N = 81) 71 81 81
Staphylococcus hominis (N = 35) 32 33 35
Staphylococcus capitis (N = 18) 17 18 18
Staphylococcus haemolyticus (N = 50) 49 48 50
Staphylococcus aureus (N = 17) 17 17 17
Enterobacter cloacae (N = 13) 13 13 13
Proteus mirabilis (N = 5) 5 5 5
Escherichia coli (N = 13) 13 13 13
Serratia marcescens (N = 22) 22 22 22
Acinetobacter baumannii (N = 39) 39 39 39
Acinetobacter lwoffii (N = 3) 3 3 3
Candida albicans (N = 5) 5 5 5
Candida glabrata (N = 5) 5 5 5
Candida krusei (N = 2) 2 2 2
Candida tropicalis (N = 3) 3 3 3
Enterobacter aerogenes (N = 8) 8 8 8
Enterococcus faecium (N = 4) 4 4 4
Klebsiella pneumoniae (N = 43) 43 42 43
Morganella morganii (N = 3) 3 3 3
Pseudomonas aeruginosa (N = 15) 15 15 15
Staphylococcus cohnii (N = 1) 1 1 1
Staphylococcus warneri (N = 1) 1 1 1
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (N = 1) 1 1 1

NP identification not performed