Bedenic B, Randegger C, Boras A, Haechler H
Department of Microbiology, School of Public Health A. Stampar, Medical School, University of Zagreb, Croatia.
J Chemother. 2001 Feb;13(1):24-33. doi: 10.1179/joc.2001.13.1.24.
Five different methods for detection of different types of SHV extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBL) were compared: minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) determination of beta-lactam with and without clavulanic acid, double-disk synergy test (DDST), inhibitor potentiated disk diffusion test (IPDDT), three-dimensional test (TDT) and PCR/Nhe I test. MIC determination of beta-lactam with and without clavulanic acid was the most sensitive method regardless of the type of beta-lactamase. However the specificity of this method was a little above 90%. IPDDT turned out to be a very sensitive method too but it lacks specificity because 26.9% of ceftazidime sensitive strains (putative ESBL negative), gave a positive result. It is important to put all four disks on the plate because ceftazidime and aztreonam were more sensitive indicators for SHV-5 and SHV-12 beta-lactamase producers while cefotaxime and ceftriaxone were more reliable in detecting SHV-2 beta-lactamase producers. The DDST detected all SHV-5 and SHV-12 beta-lactamase producers and 95.2% of SHV-2, so it was less sensitive than MIC determination but was highly specific, since there were no false negative results observed. The sensitivity of DDST can be improved by using all four disks and placing them at the smaller distance from the central disk (2.5 cm). The TDT was the least sensitive method, particularly for SHV-5 and SHV-12 beta-lactamase producers. The PCR/Nhe I test for detection of ESBL blaSHV genes is a highly sensitive and specific method but it is rather laborious and thus not very practical for use in routine clinical laboratories. Nevertheless it has potential to serve as the gold standard in epidemiological investigations on ESBLs. According to the results of this investigation MIC determination of beta-lactam with and without clavulanic acid, even if only one antibiotic is used and the PCR/Nhe I tests are the most reliable methods for detection of SHV ESBLs.
比较了五种检测不同类型超广谱β-内酰胺酶(ESBL)中SHV型的方法:测定含与不含克拉维酸的β-内酰胺的最低抑菌浓度(MIC)、双纸片协同试验(DDST)、抑制剂增强纸片扩散试验(IPDDT)、三维试验(TDT)以及PCR/Nhe I试验。无论β-内酰胺酶类型如何,测定含与不含克拉维酸的β-内酰胺的MIC是最敏感的方法。然而,该方法的特异性略高于90%。结果表明IPDDT也是一种非常敏感的方法,但缺乏特异性,因为26.9%的头孢他啶敏感菌株(假定ESBL阴性)给出了阳性结果。将所有四个纸片放在平板上很重要,因为头孢他啶和氨曲南对SHV-5和SHV-12β-内酰胺酶产生菌是更敏感的指标,而头孢噻肟和头孢曲松在检测SHV-2β-内酰胺酶产生菌方面更可靠。DDST检测出了所有的SHV-5和SHV-12β-内酰胺酶产生菌以及95.2%的SHV-2,因此其敏感性低于MIC测定,但特异性很高,因为未观察到假阴性结果。通过使用所有四个纸片并将它们放置在距中心纸片较小的距离(2.5 cm)处,可以提高DDST的敏感性。TDT是最不敏感的方法,尤其是对于SHV-5和SHV-12β-内酰胺酶产生菌。用于检测ESBL blaSHV基因的PCR/Nhe I试验是一种高度敏感和特异的方法,但相当繁琐,因此在常规临床实验室中不太实用。然而,它有潜力作为ESBLs流行病学调查的金标准。根据本研究结果,测定含与不含克拉维酸的β-内酰胺的MIC,即使只使用一种抗生素,以及PCR/Nhe I试验是检测SHV ESBLs最可靠的方法。