Brusa Victoria, Piñeyro Pablo E, Galli Lucía, Linares Luciano H, Ortega Emanuel E, Padola Nora L, Leotta Gerardo A
1 Laboratorio de Microbiología de Alimentos, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias, Universidad Nacional de La Plata (UNLP) , Buenos Aires, Argentina .
3 Instituto de Genética Veterinaria "Ing. Fernando N. Dulout," Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) La Plata, Facultad de Ciencias Veterinarias UNLP , Buenos Aires, Argentina .
Foodborne Pathog Dis. 2016 Mar;13(3):163-70. doi: 10.1089/fpd.2015.2034. Epub 2016 Feb 2.
Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) are foodborne pathogens, and beef cattle are recognized as the principal reservoir. The aims of this study were (1) to identify the most sensitive combination of selective enrichment broths and agars for STEC isolation in artificially inoculated ground beef samples, and (2) to evaluate the most efficient combination(s) of methods for naturally contaminated ground beef samples. A total of 192 ground beef samples were artificially inoculated with STEC and non-stx bacterial strains. A combination of four enrichment broths and three agars were evaluated for sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value for STEC isolation from experimentally inoculated samples. Enrichments with either modified tryptic soy broth (mTSB) containing 8 mg/L novobiocin (mTSB-8) or modified Escherichia coli (mEC) broth followed by isolation in MacConkey agar were the most sensitive combinations for STEC isolation of artificially inoculated samples. Independently, both enrichments media followed by isolation in MacConkey were used to evaluate ground beef samples from 43 retail stores, yielding 65.1% and 58.1% stx-positive samples by RT-PCR, respectively. No difference was observed in the isolate proportions between these two methods (8/25 [32%] and 8/28 [28.6%]). Identical serotypes and stx genotypes were observed in STEC strains isolated from the same samples by either method. In this study, no single enrichment protocol was sufficient to detect all STEC in artificially inoculated samples and had considerable variation in detection ability with naturally contaminated samples. Moreover, none of the single or combinations of multiple isolation agars used were capable of identifying all STEC serogroups in either artificially inoculated or naturally occurring STEC-contaminated ground beef. Therefore, it may be prudent to conclude that there is no single method or combination of isolation methods capable of identifying all STEC serogroups.
产志贺毒素大肠杆菌(STEC)是食源性病原体,肉牛被认为是主要宿主。本研究的目的是:(1)确定在人工接种的碎牛肉样本中分离STEC时,选择性增菌肉汤和琼脂的最敏感组合;(2)评估自然污染的碎牛肉样本的最有效方法组合。总共192份碎牛肉样本被人工接种了STEC和非stx细菌菌株。评估了四种增菌肉汤和三种琼脂的组合,用于从实验接种样本中分离STEC的敏感性、特异性和阳性预测值。使用含有8mg/L新生霉素的改良胰蛋白胨大豆肉汤(mTSB)或改良大肠杆菌(mEC)肉汤进行增菌,随后在麦康凯琼脂上分离,是人工接种样本中分离STEC的最敏感组合。单独地,这两种增菌培养基随后在麦康凯琼脂上分离,用于评估来自43家零售店的碎牛肉样本,通过逆转录聚合酶链反应(RT-PCR)分别产生65.1%和58.1%的stx阳性样本。这两种方法之间的分离比例没有差异(8/25 [32%]和8/28 [28.6%])。通过任何一种方法从相同样本中分离的STEC菌株中观察到相同的血清型和stx基因型。在本研究中,没有单一的增菌方案足以检测人工接种样本中的所有STEC,并且在检测自然污染样本时检测能力有相当大的差异。此外,所使用的单一或多种分离琼脂的组合都不能识别人工接种或自然存在的STEC污染的碎牛肉中的所有STEC血清群。因此,谨慎的结论可能是,没有单一的方法或分离方法组合能够识别所有STEC血清群。