...
首页> 外文期刊>Annals of laboratory medicine. >Evaluation of MicroScan Synergies plus Positive Combo 3 Panels for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus Species
【24h】

Evaluation of MicroScan Synergies plus Positive Combo 3 Panels for Identification and Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing of Staphylococcus aureus and Enterococcus Species

机译:评估MicroScan协同作用和阳性Combo 3组合用于金黄色葡萄球菌和肠球菌物种的鉴定和抗菌药物敏感性测试

获取原文
           

摘要

Background : Few studies have evaluated the performance of the recently introduced MicroScan Synergies plus Positive Combo 3 Panels (SIPC3) (Dade Behring Inc., USA). We evaluated the clinical efficacy of the panels in identification (ID) and antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) of Staphylococcus aureus and enterococci. Methods : To evaluate the panels’ accuracy of identification, the results obtained using the test panels were compared with those obtained by using conventional biochemical tests in conjunction with VITEK 2 system (bio-Merieux, USA). In addition, the AST results obtained using the panels were compared with those obtained by performing CLSI broth microdilution. Results : The overall agreement between the approaches for the ID of S. aureus and enterococci was 100% and 96%, respectively. The categorical and essential agreements (CA and EA) for S. aureus were 98%, each. Very major errors (VME), major errors (ME), and minor error (mE) for S. aureus were 0.45%, 0.3%, and 4.2%, respectively. The majority of VMEs were for oxacillin (8.6%), penicillin (2.0%), erythromycin (7.9%), clindamycin (3.8%), and tetracycline (4.1%). For enterococci, the CA, EA, VME, ME, and mE were 88.8%, 93.7%, 4.4%, 0%, and 2.8%, respectively. The 80.5% (29/36) of Enterococcus faecium had concordant ID with the reference. Most of the categorical errors (3 VMEs and 14 mEs) were observed for quinupristin/dalfopristin (Synercid; Catalytica Pharmaceuticals Inc., USA). Conclusions : The panels compared favorably with conventional methods for the ID and AST of S. aureus. However, we expected a better performance for ID of E. faecium and AST using Synercid.
机译:背景:很少有研究评估最近推出的MicroScan Synergies plus阳性组合3面板(SIPC3)(美国Dade Behring Inc.)的性能。我们评估了该小组在金黄色葡萄球菌和肠球菌的鉴定(ID)和抗菌药敏试验(AST)中的临床疗效。方法:为了评估面板的识别准确性,将使用测试面板获得的结果与结合VITEK 2系统(bio-Merieux,美国)使用常规生化测试获得的结果进行比较。另外,将使用板获得的AST结果与通过进行CLSI肉汤微量稀释获得的AST结果进行比较。结果:金黄色葡萄球菌ID法和肠球菌法之间的总体一致性分别为100%和96%。金黄色葡萄球菌的绝对分类协议(CA和EA)均为98%。金黄色葡萄球菌的非常主要误差(VME),主要误差(ME)和次要误差(mE)分别为0.45%,0.3%和4.2%。多数VME用于奥沙西林(8.6%),青霉素(2.0%),红霉素(7.9%),克林霉素(3.8%)和四环素(4.1%)。对于肠球菌,CA,EA,VME,ME和mE分别为88.8%,93.7%,4.4%,0%和2.8%。粪肠球菌的80.5%(29/36)的ID与参考一致。奎奴普丁/达福普汀(Synercid; Catalytica Pharmaceuticals Inc.,美国)观察到大多数分类错误(3个VME和14个mE)。结论:与金黄色葡萄球菌的ID和AST的常规方法相比,专家组具有优势。但是,我们期望使用Synercid可以为粪肠球菌和AST的ID提供更好的性能。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号