2EA Dynamyc, Université Paris Est Créteil- Ecole Vétérinaire de Maison Alfort, F-94000 Créteil, France.
1Unité de Bactériologie-Hygiène, Département de Virologie, Bactériologie-Hygiène, Parasitologie-Mycologie, Unité Transversale de Traitement des Infections, Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, DHU 'Virus, Immunité et Cancers', Assistance Publique - Hôpitaux de Paris, F-94000 Créteil, France.
J Med Microbiol. 2018 Nov;67(11):1581-1588. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.000847. Epub 2018 Oct 11.
Isolating colonies and obtaining accurate colony counts from bacterial cultures are critical steps for the optimal management of infected patients. The uncertainties in the colony count results from the bacterial cultures were evaluated by verifying the performance of the WASP inoculation system according to the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189 standard.
We first (i) evaluated the cross-contamination and precision of the WASP instrument (Copan Diagnostics, Italy) and (ii) established enumeration reading grids for urine, swab, bronchopulmonary specimens (BPSs) and catheter tip cultures. Subsequently, 72 clinical samples were tested to compare the results of the WASP, PREVI Isola (bioMérieux, France) and manual inoculation methods.
The WASP method did not show cross-contamination. The coefficient of variation for the colony counts in the repeatability experiment was evaluated for 10 µl and 30 µl loop protocols and determined to be 29 and 14 %, respectively. The agreement between the automated and manual methods and between the automated methods for the colony counts was high (94.4 and 100 %, respectively). The WASP method yielded better isolation quality compared to the manual method (P=0.020) and to the PREVI Isola only when polymicrobial specimens were considered (P=0.014). For quantification evaluation, the measurement uncertainty was evaluated to 1.8×10 c.f.u. ml for a suspension of Escherichia coli at 10 c.f.u. ml.
We report the verification of the performance of the WASP instrument and describe a rapid procedure for achieving semi-quantitative cultures from BPSs and catheter tips. Quantitative interpretation of the bacterial cultures should be performed with caution.
从细菌培养物中分离菌落并获得准确的菌落计数对于感染患者的最佳管理至关重要。通过根据国际标准化组织(ISO)15189 标准验证 WASP 接种系统的性能,评估了来自细菌培养物的菌落计数结果的不确定性。
我们首先(i)评估了 WASP 仪器(意大利科潘诊断公司)的交叉污染和精密度,(ii)为尿液、拭子、支气管肺标本(BPS)和导管尖端培养物建立了计数读数网格。随后,测试了 72 个临床样本,以比较 WASP、PREVI Isola(法国生物梅里埃公司)和手动接种方法的结果。
WASP 方法未显示交叉污染。在重复性实验中,10 μl 和 30 μl 环方案的菌落计数的变异系数分别评估为 29%和 14%。自动方法和手动方法之间以及自动方法之间的菌落计数一致性很高(分别为 94.4%和 100%)。与手动方法相比,WASP 方法的分离质量更好(P=0.020),仅当考虑多微生物标本时,与 PREVI Isola 方法相比(P=0.014)。对于定量评估,将测量不确定度评估为 10 c.f.u. ml 悬浮液中大肠杆菌为 1.8×10 c.f.u. ml。
我们报告了 WASP 仪器性能的验证,并描述了一种从 BPS 和导管尖端获得半定量培养物的快速程序。应谨慎进行细菌培养物的定量解释。