Suppr超能文献

评估NG-Test MCR-1侧向流动分析和乙二胺四乙酸-黏菌素肉汤纸片洗脱法检测革兰氏阴性菌分离株中质粒介导的黏菌素耐药性

Evaluation of the NG-Test MCR-1 Lateral Flow Assay and EDTA-Colistin Broth Disk Elution Methods To Detect Plasmid-Mediated Colistin Resistance among Gram-Negative Bacterial Isolates.

作者信息

Fenwick Alexander J, Bergman Yehudit, Lewis Shawna, Yee Rebecca, Uhlemann Anne-Catrin, Cole Nicolynn, Kohner Peggy, Ordak Carly, Green Daniel A, Schuetz Audrey N, Humphries Romney, Simner Patricia J

机构信息

Division of Medical Microbiology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Division of Infectious Diseases, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Mar 25;58(4). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01823-19.

Abstract

Plasmid-mediated colistin resistance (PMCR) is a global public health concern, given its ease of transmissibility. The purpose of this study was to evaluate two methods for the detection of PMCR from bacterial colonies: (i) the NG-Test MCR-1 lateral flow immunoassay (LFA; NG Biotech, Guipry, France) and (ii) the EDTA-colistin broth disk elution (EDTA-CBDE) screening test method. These methods were evaluated using a cohort of contemporary, clinical Gram-negative bacillus isolates from 3 U.S. academic medical centers (126 isolates of the , 50 isolates, and 50 species isolates; 1 isolate was positive) and 12 -positive CDC-FDA Antibiotic Resistance (AR) Isolate Bank isolates for which reference broth microdilution colistin susceptibility results were available. Eleven (4.6%) isolates were strongly positive by the MCR-1 LFA, with an additional 8 (3.4%) isolates yielding faintly positive results. The positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) for MCR-1 detection were 100% and 96.1%, respectively. Upon repeat testing, only a single false-positive MCR-2 producer remained, as the isolates with initially faintly positive results were negative. The EDTA-CBDE screening method had an overall PPA and NPA of 100% and 94.3%, respectively. The NPA for the EDTA-CBDE method was slightly lower at 94.2% with , whereas it was 96.0% with The MCR-1 LFA and EDTA-CBDE methods are both accurate and user-friendly methods for the detection of PMCR. Despite the rarity of PMCR among clinical isolates in the United States, these methods are valuable tools that may be implemented in public health and clinical microbiology laboratories to further discern the mechanism of resistance among colistin-resistant Gram-negative isolates and to detect PMCR for infection prevention and control purposes.

摘要

鉴于质粒介导的黏菌素耐药性(PMCR)易于传播,它已成为一个全球公共卫生问题。本研究的目的是评估两种从细菌菌落中检测PMCR的方法:(i)NG-Test MCR-1侧向流动免疫分析法(LFA;NG Biotech,法国吉普里)和(ii)乙二胺四乙酸-黏菌素肉汤纸片洗脱(EDTA-CBDE)筛选试验方法。使用来自美国3家学术医疗中心的一组当代临床革兰氏阴性杆菌分离株(126株 分离株、50株 分离株和50株 种分离株;1株分离株为 阳性)以及12株对黏菌素耐药且有美国疾病控制与预防中心-美国食品药品监督管理局抗生素耐药性(AR)分离株库的阳性分离株进行评估,这些分离株有可用的参考肉汤微量稀释法测定的黏菌素敏感性结果。11株(4.6%)分离株通过MCR-1 LFA检测为强阳性,另有8株(3.4%)分离株结果为弱阳性。MCR-1检测的阳性百分一致率(PPA)和阴性百分一致率(NPA)分别为100%和96.1%。重复检测时,由于最初结果为弱阳性的分离株呈阴性,仅剩下1株假阳性MCR-2产生菌。EDTA-CBDE筛选方法的总体PPA和NPA分别为100%和94.3%。EDTA-CBDE方法对 的NPA略低,为94.2%;对 则为96.0%。MCR-1 LFA和EDTA-CBDE方法都是检测PMCR的准确且用户友好的方法。尽管在美国临床分离株中PMCR罕见,但这些方法是有价值的工具,可在公共卫生和临床微生物实验室中应用,以进一步辨别耐黏菌素革兰氏阴性分离株的耐药机制,并为感染预防和控制目的检测PMCR。

相似文献

8
How to: screening for mcr-mediated resistance to colistin.如何进行:检测 mcr 介导的对黏菌素耐药性的筛查。
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2022 Jan;28(1):43-50. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.09.009. Epub 2021 Sep 16.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

6
Emergence of Colistin Resistance Gene and Its Variant in .黏菌素耐药基因及其变体在……中的出现
Front Microbiol. 2019 Feb 15;10:228. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.00228. eCollection 2019.
9
Colistin resistance, beyond the current knowledge.超出当前认知的黏菌素耐药性
EBioMedicine. 2018 Aug;34:16-17. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.08.002. Epub 2018 Aug 10.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验