Alexopoulou K, Foka A, Petinaki E, Jelastopulu E, Dimitracopoulos G, Spiliopoulou I
Department of Microbiology, School of Medicine, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Lett Appl Microbiol. 2006 Oct;43(4):450-4. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-765X.2006.01964.x.
Two commercial methods for the identification of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were compared with the restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) of the amplified tuf gene, which served as the reference method.
One hundred and forty-five CNS were evaluated using the API 32 Staph ID and the Crystal GP/ID BBL systems. The PCR-RFLP of the tuf gene served as the reference method. The APIStaph and the GP/ID BBL had an overall rate of agreement with the molecular method of 58.6% and 46.2% respectively, with the inability of the GP/ID BBL to characterize 11.7% of the isolates. The APIStaph showed higher sensitivity and better agreement than the GP/ID BBL with the PCR-RFLP, except for Staphylococcus hominis and Staphylococcus capitis.
Neither of the commercial systems was as reliable as the PCR-RFLP method for identifying isolates of CNS. Overall the APIStaph had better agreement with the PCR-RFLP than the GP/ID system.
The results indicate that the PCR-RFLP method is more reliable than the two commercial systems tested, suggesting that it is more reliable for routinely identifying CNS.
将两种用于鉴定凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌（CNS）的商业方法与扩增的tuf基因的限制性片段长度多态性（RFLP）进行比较，后者作为参考方法。
使用API 32 Staph ID和Crystal GP/ID BBL系统对145株CNS进行评估。tuf基因的PCR-RFLP作为参考方法。APIStaph和GP/ID BBL与分子方法的总体符合率分别为58.6%和46.2%，GP/ID BBL无法鉴定11.7%的分离株。除人葡萄球菌和头葡萄球菌外，APIStaph与PCR-RFLP相比显示出更高的敏感性和更好的符合率。
两种商业系统在鉴定CNS分离株方面都不如PCR-RFLP方法可靠。总体而言，APIStaph与PCR-RFLP的符合率优于GP/ID系统。
结果表明，PCR-RFLP方法比所测试的两种商业系统更可靠，这表明它在常规鉴定CNS方面更可靠。
