Borchardt K A, Gibson J
Health Lab Sci. 1977 Jan;14(1):5-10.
An evaluation of methods for identification of Enterobacteriaceae was made employing the new commercial Micro-Media Enteric System (MMES) with that of the Analytab Products Incorporated (API) and the Conventional tube media schema as suggested by the Center for Disease Control (CDS). The MMES system employed 20 biochemical tests, the API 21, and the CDC procedure 25. Sixteen of these were identical biochemical tests. Two hundred clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae were tested employing procedures recommended by the manufacturers of MMES and API, and methods suggested by CDC. Among the sixteen identical biochemical tests the agreement was 98.0% (Conventional), 98.2% (API), and 97.98% (MMES). Bacteria misidentified by the API system totaled 5 (2.5%), 12 (6%) for the Conventional, and 13 (6.5%) for the MMES. Five of the bacteria misidentified with the MMES procedure were due to false positive citrate tests. This problem was subsequently eliminated. The results of this study indicated that the new MMES method for identification of Enterobacteriaceae compared favorably with both the API and Conventional procedures. However, significant advantages of the MMES method were evident in initial purchase price, utilization of technology time, and less tedium performing the test.
采用新型商用微媒体肠道菌鉴定系统(MMES),并与分析实验室产品公司(API)的系统以及美国疾病控制中心(CDC)建议的传统试管培养基方案,对肠杆菌科细菌的鉴定方法进行了评估。MMES系统采用20项生化试验,API系统采用21项,CDC方法采用25项。其中16项是相同的生化试验。采用MMES和API制造商推荐的程序以及CDC建议的方法,对200株肠杆菌科临床分离株进行了检测。在这16项相同的生化试验中,一致性分别为98.0%(传统方法)、98.2%(API)和97.98%(MMES)。API系统错误鉴定的细菌有5株(2.5%),传统方法有12株(6%),MMES有13株(6.5%)。MMES方法错误鉴定的5株细菌是由于柠檬酸盐试验出现假阳性。该问题随后得到解决。本研究结果表明,用于鉴定肠杆菌科细菌的新型MMES方法与API和传统方法相比具有优势。然而,MMES方法在初始购买价格、技术时间利用以及试验操作的繁琐程度方面具有明显优势。