Barrett Timothy J, Gerner-Smidt Peter, Swaminathan Bala
Foodborne and Diarrheal Diseases Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 30033, USA.
Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2006 Spring;3(1):20-31. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2006.3.20.
Since the establishment of the well-known Tenover criteria in 1995 (Tenover et al., 1995), relatively few papers have been published about the interpretation of subtyping data generated by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). This paper describes the approach that has been used in the PulseNet network during the past 10 years. PFGE data must always be interpreted in the proper epidemiological context and PFGE data can not alone prove an epidemiological connection. The Tenover criteria are not generally applicable to the interpretation of PFGE subtyping data of foodborne pathogens. The reproducibility of the method with a particular organism, the quality of the PFGE gel, the variability of the organism being subtyped, and the prevalence of the pattern in question must always be considered. Only isolates displaying indistinguishable patterns should be included in the detection of clusters of infections or the initial case definition in a point-source outbreak. More variability (patterns differing from each other in two to three band positions) may be accepted if the outbreak has been going on for some time or if person-person spread is a prominent feature. If epidemiological information is sufficiently strong, isolates with markedly different PFGE patterns may be included in an outbreak.
自1995年著名的特诺弗标准（Tenover等人，1995年）确立以来，关于脉冲场凝胶电泳（PFGE）产生的亚型数据解释的论文发表相对较少。本文描述了过去10年中脉冲网络（PulseNet）所采用的方法。PFGE数据必须始终在适当的流行病学背景下进行解释，而且PFGE数据本身不能证明存在流行病学关联。特诺弗标准通常不适用于食源性病原体PFGE亚型数据的解释。必须始终考虑该方法对特定生物体的可重复性、PFGE凝胶的质量、被分型生物体的变异性以及所讨论模式的流行情况。在检测感染集群或点源暴发的初始病例定义时，仅应纳入显示出难以区分模式的分离株。如果暴发已经持续了一段时间，或者人传人传播是一个突出特征，那么可以接受更多的变异性（在两到三个条带位置上彼此不同的模式）。如果流行病学信息足够有力，具有明显不同PFGE模式的分离株也可纳入暴发调查。
