• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

相似文献

1
Clinical Performance of the Novel GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture ID Gram-Positive Panel.新型GenMark Dx ePlex血培养鉴定革兰氏阳性菌检测板的临床性能
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Mar 25;58(4). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01730-19.
2
A Closer Look at the Laboratory Impact of Utilizing ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels: a Workflow Analysis Using Rapid Molecular Detection for Positive Blood Cultures.利用 ePlex 血培养鉴定板对实验室影响的深入观察:利用快速分子检测对阳性血培养物的工作流程分析。
Microbiol Spectr. 2022 Oct 26;10(5):e0179622. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.01796-22. Epub 2022 Sep 7.
3
A Multicenter Clinical Study To Demonstrate the Diagnostic Accuracy of the GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Negative Panel.一项多中心临床研究,旨在验证 GenMark Dx ePlex 血培养鉴定革兰氏阴性菌 panel 的诊断准确性。
J Clin Microbiol. 2021 Aug 18;59(9):e0248420. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02484-20.
4
Analytical performance and potential clinical utility of the GenMark Dx ePlex® blood culture identification gram-positive panel.GenMark Dx ePlex®血培养鉴定革兰氏阳性菌检测板的分析性能及潜在临床应用价值
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2022 Nov;104(3):115762. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2022.115762. Epub 2022 Jul 11.
5
Accuracy of Broad-Panel PCR-Based Bacterial Identification for Blood Cultures in a Pediatric Oncology Population.广谱 PCR 检测在儿科肿瘤人群血培养中的细菌鉴定准确性。
Microbiol Spectr. 2021 Sep 3;9(1):e0022121. doi: 10.1128/Spectrum.00221-21. Epub 2021 Jul 7.
6
Multicenter Evaluation of a PCR-Based Digital Microfluidics and Electrochemical Detection System for the Rapid Identification of 15 Fungal Pathogens Directly from Positive Blood Cultures.基于聚合酶链反应的数字微流控和电化学检测系统用于直接从阳性血培养物中快速鉴定15种真菌病原体的多中心评估
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Apr 23;58(5). doi: 10.1128/JCM.02096-19.
7
Test Performance and Potential Clinical Utility of the GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Negative Panel.GenMark Dx ePlex 血培养鉴定革兰氏阴性面板的测试性能和潜在临床应用。
Microbiol Spectr. 2023 Feb 14;11(1):e0409222. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.04092-22. Epub 2023 Jan 23.
8
Multiplex identification of gram-positive bacteria and resistance determinants directly from positive blood culture broths: evaluation of an automated microarray-based nucleic acid test.从阳性血培养肉汤中直接多重鉴定革兰氏阳性菌和耐药决定因子:一种自动化基于微阵列核酸检测方法的评估。
PLoS Med. 2013;10(7):e1001478. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001478. Epub 2013 Jul 2.
9
Evaluation of the nanosphere verigene gram-positive blood culture assay with the VersaTREK blood culture system and assessment of possible impact on selected patients.使用VersaTREK血培养系统对纳米球Verigene革兰氏阳性血培养检测法进行评估,并评估对特定患者可能产生的影响。
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Dec;51(12):3988-92. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01889-13. Epub 2013 Sep 18.
10
Rapid detection of Gram-positive organisms by use of the Verigene Gram-positive blood culture nucleic acid test and the BacT/Alert Pediatric FAN system in a multicenter pediatric evaluation.多中心儿科评估中,应用 Verigene 革兰阳性菌血培养核酸检测和 BacT/Alert Pediatric FAN 系统快速检测革兰阳性菌
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Nov;51(11):3579-84. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01224-13. Epub 2013 Aug 21.

引用本文的文献

1
The role of rapid multiplex molecular syndromic panels in the clinical management of infections in critically ill patients: an experts-opinion document.快速多重分子综合征检测板在重症患者感染临床管理中的作用:一份专家意见文件。
Crit Care. 2024 Dec 30;28(1):440. doi: 10.1186/s13054-024-05224-3.
2
Getting Up to Speed: Rapid Pathogen and Antimicrobial Resistance Diagnostics in Sepsis.紧跟前沿:脓毒症中快速病原体及抗菌药物耐药性诊断
Microorganisms. 2024 Sep 3;12(9):1824. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms12091824.
3
Impact of Introducing a Multiplex Polymerase Chain Reaction Blood Culture Panel on Anti-Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Carbapenem Antimicrobial Agents in a Children's Hospital.引入多重聚合酶链反应血培养检测板对一家儿童医院抗耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)和碳青霉烯类抗菌药物的影响。
Cureus. 2024 Aug 6;16(8):e66282. doi: 10.7759/cureus.66282. eCollection 2024 Aug.
4
Advancing quantitative PCR with color cycle multiplex amplification.利用颜色循环多重扩增推进定量 PCR。
Nucleic Acids Res. 2024 Sep 23;52(17):e81. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkae683.
5
Clinical impact and cost-consequence analysis of ePlex® blood culture identification panels for the rapid diagnosis of bloodstream infections: a single-center randomized controlled trial.ePlex® 血培养鉴定试剂盒在快速诊断血流感染中的临床影响和成本-效果分析:一项单中心随机对照试验。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2024 Jun;43(6):1193-1203. doi: 10.1007/s10096-024-04820-z. Epub 2024 Mar 27.
6
Clinical utility of multiplex PCR in the detection of pathogens from sterile body fluids.多重 PCR 在检测无菌体液病原体中的临床应用。
J Clin Microbiol. 2024 Apr 10;62(4):e0161123. doi: 10.1128/jcm.01611-23. Epub 2024 Mar 12.
7
Global impact of antibacterial resistance in patients with hematologic malignancies and hematopoietic cell transplant recipients.血液恶性肿瘤和造血细胞移植受者的抗菌耐药全球影响。
Transpl Infect Dis. 2023 Nov;25 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):e14169. doi: 10.1111/tid.14169. Epub 2023 Oct 20.
8
A PCR-Reverse Dot Blot Hybridization Based Microfluidics Detection System for the Rapid Identification of 13 Fungal Pathogens Directly After Blood Cultures Over a Period of Time.一种基于聚合酶链反应-反向斑点杂交的微流控检测系统,用于在一段时间内直接对血培养后的13种真菌病原体进行快速鉴定。
Infect Drug Resist. 2023 Aug 16;16:5347-5357. doi: 10.2147/IDR.S424156. eCollection 2023.
9
Shortening identification times: comparative observational study of three early blood culture testing protocols.缩短鉴定时间:三种早期血培养检测方案的比较观察性研究。
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2023 Jul 18;13:1192002. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2023.1192002. eCollection 2023.
10
Diagnosis of invasive fungal infections: challenges and recent developments.侵袭性真菌感染的诊断:挑战与新进展。
J Biomed Sci. 2023 Jun 19;30(1):42. doi: 10.1186/s12929-023-00926-2.

本文引用的文献

1
Advances in Rapid Molecular Blood Culture Diagnostics: Healthcare Impact, Laboratory Implications, and Multiplex Technologies.快速分子血液培养诊断技术的进展:对医疗保健的影响、实验室意义及多重技术
J Appl Lab Med. 2019 Jan;3(4):617-630. doi: 10.1373/jalm.2018.027409. Epub 2018 Nov 21.
2
Staphylococcus lugdunensis: antimicrobial susceptibility and optimal treatment options.路邓葡萄球菌:药敏试验和最佳治疗选择。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 Aug;38(8):1449-1455. doi: 10.1007/s10096-019-03571-6. Epub 2019 May 29.
3
Antimicrobial Stewardship Opportunities in Patients with Bacteremia Not Identified by BioFire FilmArray.血培养未鉴定出的菌血症患者中的抗菌药物管理机会
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Apr 26;57(5). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01941-18. Print 2019 May.
4
The GenMark ePlex: another weapon in the syndromic arsenal for infection diagnosis.GenMark ePlex:感染诊断症候群武器库中的又一利器。
Future Microbiol. 2018 Dec;13(16):1697-1708. doi: 10.2217/fmb-2018-0258. Epub 2018 Dec 14.
5
Evaluation of the ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels for Detection of Pathogens in Bloodstream Infections.评估 ePlex 血培养鉴定板在检测血流感染病原体中的应用。
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Jan 30;57(2). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01597-18. Print 2019 Feb.
6
Deaths: Final Data for 2016.死亡:2016年最终数据。
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2018 Jul;67(5):1-76.
7
Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Molecular Characterization, Evolution, and Epidemiology.耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌:分子特征、进化与流行病学。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018 Sep 12;31(4). doi: 10.1128/CMR.00020-18. Print 2018 Oct.
8
Evaluation of the Bruker® MBT Sepsityper IVD module for the identification of polymicrobial blood cultures with MALDI-TOF MS.采用 MALDI-TOF MS 对布鲁克® MBT Sepsityper IVD 模块进行鉴定多微生物血培养物的评估。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018 Nov;37(11):2145-2152. doi: 10.1007/s10096-018-3351-2. Epub 2018 Aug 20.
9
Diagnosis of bloodstream infections from positive blood cultures and directly from blood samples: recent developments in molecular approaches.从阳性血培养和直接血样本中诊断血流感染:分子方法的最新进展。
Clin Microbiol Infect. 2018 Sep;24(9):944-955. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2018.05.007. Epub 2018 May 19.
10
Emerging Technologies for Molecular Diagnosis of Sepsis.脓毒症分子诊断的新兴技术。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018 Feb 28;31(2). doi: 10.1128/CMR.00089-17. Print 2018 Apr.

新型GenMark Dx ePlex血培养鉴定革兰氏阳性菌检测板的临床性能

Clinical Performance of the Novel GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture ID Gram-Positive Panel.

作者信息

Carroll Karen C, Reid Jennifer L, Thornberg Adam, Whitfield Natalie N, Trainor Deirdre, Lewis Shawna, Wakefield Teresa, Davis Thomas E, Church Keisha G, Samuel Linoj, Mills Ray, Jim Patricia, Young Stephen, Nolte Frederick S

机构信息

Division of Medical Microbiology, Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

GenMark Diagnostics Inc., Carlsbad, California, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Mar 25;58(4). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01730-19.

DOI:10.1128/JCM.01730-19
PMID:31996444
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7098771/
Abstract

Rapid identification from positive blood cultures is standard of care (SOC) in many clinical microbiology laboratories. The GenMark Dx ePlex Blood Culture Identification Gram-Positive (BCID-GP) Panel is a multiplex nucleic acid amplification assay based on competitive DNA hybridization and electrochemical detection using eSensor technology. This multicenter study compared the investigational-use-only (IUO) BCID-GP Panel to other methods of identification of 20 Gram-positive bacteria, four antimicrobial resistance genes, and both Pan and Pan Gram-Negative targets that are unique to the BCID-GP Panel. Ten microbiology laboratories throughout the United States collected residual, deidentified positive blood culture samples for analysis. Five laboratories tested both clinical and contrived samples with the BCID-GP Panel. Comparator identification methods included each laboratory's SOC, which included matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) and automated identification systems as well as targeted PCR/analytically validated real-time PCR (qPCR) with bidirectional sequencing. A total of 2,342 evaluable samples (1,777 clinical and 565 contrived) were tested with the BCID-GP Panel. The overall sample accuracy for on-panel organisms was 89% before resolution of discordant results. For pathogenic Gram-positive targets ( group, spp., , , spp., , , , spp., , spp., , group, , and ), positive percent agreement (PPA) and negative percent agreement (NPA) ranged from 93.1% to 100% and 98.8% to 100%, respectively. For contamination rule-out targets ( group, , , , and ), PPA and NPA ranged from 84.5% to 100% and 99.9% to 100%, respectively. Positive percent agreement and NPA for the Pan and Pan Gram-Negative targets were 92.4% and 95.7% for the former and 99.9% and 99.6% for the latter. The PPAs for resistance markers were as follows: , 97.2%; , 100%; , 96.8%; and , 100%. Negative percent agreement ranged from 96.6% to 100%. In conclusion, the ePlex BCID-GP Panel compares favorably to SOC and targeted molecular methods for the identification of 20 Gram-positive pathogens and four antimicrobial resistance genes in positive blood culture bottles. This panel detects a broad range of pathogens and mixed infections with yeast and Gram-negative organisms from the same positive blood culture bottle.

摘要

在许多临床微生物实验室中,从阳性血培养物中快速鉴定是标准治疗方法(SOC)。GenMark Dx ePlex血培养鉴定革兰氏阳性(BCID-GP)检测板是一种基于竞争性DNA杂交和使用eSensor技术的电化学检测的多重核酸扩增检测方法。这项多中心研究将仅供研究使用(IUO)的BCID-GP检测板与其他鉴定20种革兰氏阳性菌、四种抗菌药物耐药基因以及BCID-GP检测板特有的泛菌和泛革兰氏阴性靶标的方法进行了比较。美国各地的十个微生物实验室收集了残留的、已去除身份信息的阳性血培养样本进行分析。五个实验室使用BCID-GP检测板对临床样本和人工样本进行了检测。比较鉴定方法包括每个实验室的SOC,其中包括基质辅助激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF MS)和自动鉴定系统,以及靶向PCR/经分析验证的实时PCR(qPCR)和双向测序。总共用BCID-GP检测板检测了2342个可评估样本(1777个临床样本和565个人工样本)。在不一致结果解决之前,检测板上生物体的总体样本准确率为89%。对于致病性革兰氏阳性靶标( 组、 spp.、 、 、 spp.、 、 、 、 spp.、 、 spp.、 、 组、 、 ),阳性百分一致率(PPA)和阴性百分一致率(NPA)分别为93.1%至100%和98.8%至100%。对于污染排除靶标( 组、 、 、 、 ),PPA和NPA分别为84.5%至100%和99.9%至100%。泛菌和泛革兰氏阴性靶标的PPA分别为92.4%和95.7%,NPA分别为99.9%和99.6%。耐药标志物的PPA如下: ,97.2%; , 100%; ,96.8%;以及 ,100%。阴性百分一致率为96.6%至100%。总之,ePlex BCID-GP检测板在鉴定阳性血培养瓶中的20种革兰氏阳性病原体和四种抗菌药物耐药基因方面,与SOC和靶向分子方法相比具有优势。该检测板可检测来自同一阳性血培养瓶的多种病原体以及酵母和革兰氏阴性菌的混合感染。