首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparison of an Automated Ribotyping System to Restriction Endonuclease Analysis and Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis for Differentiating Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium Isolates
【24h】

Comparison of an Automated Ribotyping System to Restriction Endonuclease Analysis and Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis for Differentiating Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium Isolates

机译:自动化核糖体分型系统与限制性内切核酸酶分析和脉冲场凝胶电泳的比较,以区分耐万古霉素的粪肠球菌分离株

获取原文
           

摘要

The RiboPrinter Microbial Characterization System was compared with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), restriction endonuclease analysis (REA), and epidemiological data for typing 45 vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) isolates. In 21 clinically related isolates, 90 to 100% were similar by PFGE and REA, but only 57% were similar by the RiboPrinter. In another eight clinically related isolates, three isolates similar by PFGE and REA were all unique by the RiboPrinter. In contrast, in 16 clinically unrelated isolates, the predominant RiboPrinter ribotype represented 50% of the strains, while the largest PFGE and REA clones represented less than 19% of the strains. These data suggest that the RiboPrinter is not reliable for VRE investigation.
机译:将RiboPrinter微生物表征系统与脉冲场凝胶电泳(PFGE),限制性内切核酸酶分析(REA)和用于鉴定耐万古霉素的粪肠球菌(em)肠球菌(em)的45种分离株的流行病学数据进行了比较。在21种临床相关菌株中,PFGE和REA具有90%至100%的相似性,而RiboPrinter仅具有57%的相似性。在另外八种与临床相关的分离株中,RiboPrinter对PFGE和REA相似的三种分离株均具有独特性。相比之下,在16个临床无关的分离株中,主要的RiboPrinter核糖型代表了50%的菌株,而最大的PFGE和REA克隆代表了不到19%的菌株。这些数据表明RiboPrinter对于VRE调查是不可靠的。

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