Suppr超能文献

多重实时PCR与PCR-反向杂交分析法用于直接快速检测阳性培养瓶中细菌及抗生素耐药决定因素的比较

Comparison of multiplex real-time PCR and PCR-reverse blot hybridization assay for the direct and rapid detection of bacteria and antibiotic resistance determinants in positive culture bottles.

作者信息

Wang Hye-Young, Kim Seoyong, Kim Jungho, Park Soon Deok, Kim Hyo Youl, Uh Young, Lee Hyeyoung

机构信息

Optipharm M&D, Inc., Wonju Eco Environmental Technology Center, Wonju, Gangwon, 26493, South Korea.

Department of Biomedical Laboratory Science, College of Health Sciences, Yonsei University, Wonju, Gangwon, 26493, South Korea.

出版信息

J Med Microbiol. 2016 Sep;65(9):962-974. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.000319. Epub 2016 Jul 21.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a commercially available multiplex real-time PCR assay and a PCR-reverse blot hybridization assay (PCR-REBA) for the rapid detection of bacteria and identification of antibiotic resistance genes directly from blood culture bottles and to compare the results of these molecular assays with conventional culture methods. The molecular diagnostic methods were used to evaluate 593 blood culture bottles from patients with bloodstream infections. The detection positivity of multiplex real-time PCR assay for Gram-positive bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria and Candida spp. was equivalent to PCR-REBA as 99.6 %, 99.1 % and 100 %, respectively. Using conventional bacterial cultures as the gold standard, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of these two molecular methods were 99.5 % [95 % confidence interval (CI), 0.980-1.000; P<0.001), 100 % (95 % CI, 0.983-1.000; P<0.001), 100 % and 99 %, respectively. However, positivity of the Real-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcusaureus multiplex real-time PCR assay targeting the mecA gene to detect methicillin resistance was lower than that of the PCR-REBA method, detecting an overall positivity of 98.4 % (n=182; 95 % CI, 0.964-1.000; P<0.009) and 99.5 % (n=184; 95 % CI, 0.985-1.000; P<0.0001), respectively. The entire two methods take about 3 h, while results from culture can take up to 48-72 h. Therefore, the use of these two molecular methods was rapid and reliable for the characterization of causative pathogens in bloodstream infections.

摘要

本研究的目的是评估一种市售的多重实时聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测方法和一种PCR反向杂交检测法(PCR-REBA)直接从血培养瓶中快速检测细菌并鉴定抗生素耐药基因的性能,并将这些分子检测方法的结果与传统培养方法进行比较。采用分子诊断方法对593例血流感染患者的血培养瓶进行评估。多重实时PCR检测法对革兰氏阳性菌、革兰氏阴性菌和念珠菌属的检测阳性率分别为99.6%、99.1%和100%,与PCR-REBA相当。以传统细菌培养为金标准,这两种分子方法的灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为99.5%[95%置信区间(CI),0.980-1.000;P<0.001]、100%(95%CI,0.983-1.000;P<0.001)、100%和99%。然而,针对mecA基因检测耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌的实时多重PCR检测法的阳性率低于PCR-REBA方法,总体阳性率分别为98.4%(n=182;95%CI,0.964-1.000;P<0.009)和99.5%(n=184;95%CI,0.985-1.000;P<0.0001)。这两种方法整个过程大约需要3小时,而培养结果可能需要长达48-72小时。因此,这两种分子方法用于血流感染中致病病原体的鉴定快速且可靠。

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