Suppr超能文献

两种用于鉴定副流感嗜血杆菌并进行生物分型的商业试剂盒的比较。

Comparison of two commercial kits for identifying and biotyping Haemophilus parainfluenzae.

作者信息

Warren M, Ahmet Z, Houang E

机构信息

Department of Microbiology, Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital, London.

出版信息

J Clin Pathol. 1991 Jan;44(1):83-4. doi: 10.1136/jcp.44.1.83.

Abstract

The Minitek system and the more recently introduced Micro Scan HNID panels for the identification and biotyping of 98 V dependent Haemophilus isolates were compared. Identical results were obtained for 77 isolates. The discrepancy in the results of ornithine and urease was accounted for mainly by the mismatching of the identification by the two kits. When 13 isolates of H parainfluenzae with mismatched biotypes were re-examined, the results from Micro Scan correlated with 92% of those obtained by Christensen's urea broth and 100% by the ornithine test (Lab M); the corresponding figures for Minitek were 61% and 30%, respectively. Micro Scan was easy to handle on the bench and results were ready on the same day. These results suggest that further work is required to assess these two systems for the biotyping of H parainfluenzae.

摘要

对用于98株V因子依赖性嗜血杆菌分离株鉴定和生物分型的Minitek系统和最近推出的Micro Scan HNID鉴定板进行了比较。77株分离株获得了相同的结果。鸟氨酸和脲酶结果的差异主要是由两种试剂盒鉴定结果不匹配造成的。当对13株生物型不匹配的副流感嗜血杆菌分离株进行重新检测时,Micro Scan的结果与克里斯滕森尿素肉汤法获得的结果的92%以及鸟氨酸试验(Lab M)获得的结果的100%相关;Minitek的相应数字分别为61%和30%。Micro Scan在实验台上易于操作,结果当天即可得出。这些结果表明,需要进一步开展工作以评估这两种系统用于副流感嗜血杆菌生物分型的情况。

相似文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验