Suppr超能文献

一种自动化微生物检测/鉴定系统的多实验室评估

Multi-laboratory evaluation of an automated microbial detection/identification system.

作者信息

Smith P B, Gavan T L, Isenberg H D, Sonnenwirth A, Taylor W I, Washington J A, Balows A

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1978 Dec;8(6):657-66. doi: 10.1128/jcm.8.6.657-666.1978.

Abstract

An automated and computerized system (Automicrobic System [AMS]) for the detection of frequently encountered bacteria in clinical urine specimens was tested in a collaborative study among six laboratories. The sensitivity, specificity, reliability, and reproducibility of the AMS were determined, and the system was compared with conventional detection and identification systems. In this study, pure cultures and mixtures of pure cultures were used to simulate clinical urine specimens. With pure cultures, the sensitivity of the AMS in identifying the nine groups of organisms most commonly found in urine averaged 92.8%. The specificity averaged 99.4%, and the reliability of a positive result averaged 92.1%. The latter value was strongly influenced by a relatively high occurrence of false positive Escherichia coli results. The AMS was capable of detecting growth of most organisms, including those which it was not designed to identify. However, it identified some of these incorrectly as common urinary tract flora. Reproducibility of results, both within laboratories and among different laboratories, was high. Fast-growing organisms, such as E. coli and Klebsiella/Enterobacter species, were detected often at cell populations well below the AMS enumeration threshold of 70,000/ml. In mixed culture studies, high levels of sensitivity and specificity were maintained but when Serratia species were present in mixtures with other organisms, there was often a false positive report of E. coli. The overall performance of the AMS was considered satisfactory under the test conditions used.

摘要

一种用于检测临床尿液标本中常见细菌的自动化计算机系统(自动微生物系统[AMS])在六个实验室的合作研究中进行了测试。测定了AMS的敏感性、特异性、可靠性和可重复性,并将该系统与传统检测和鉴定系统进行了比较。在本研究中,使用纯培养物和纯培养物混合物模拟临床尿液标本。对于纯培养物,AMS识别尿液中最常见的九组微生物的敏感性平均为92.8%。特异性平均为99.4%,阳性结果的可靠性平均为92.1%。后一个值受到相对较高的大肠杆菌假阳性结果发生率的强烈影响。AMS能够检测大多数微生物的生长,包括那些它并非设计用于识别的微生物。然而,它将其中一些错误地鉴定为常见的尿路菌群。无论是在实验室内部还是在不同实验室之间,结果的可重复性都很高。快速生长的微生物,如大肠杆菌和克雷伯菌/肠杆菌属,通常在远低于AMS计数阈值70,000/ml的细胞数量时就能被检测到。在混合培养研究中,保持了较高的敏感性和特异性,但当沙雷菌属与其他微生物混合存在时,经常会出现大肠杆菌的假阳性报告。在所使用的测试条件下,AMS的整体性能被认为是令人满意的。

相似文献

2
Automated microbiological detection/identification system.自动化微生物检测/鉴定系统。
J Clin Microbiol. 1977 Oct;6(4):406-13. doi: 10.1128/jcm.6.4.406-413.1977.
4
Screening of urine cultures by three automated systems.通过三种自动化系统对尿培养进行筛查。
J Clin Microbiol. 1982 Mar;15(3):468-74. doi: 10.1128/jcm.15.3.468-474.1982.
5
The Automicrobic System for urines.尿液自动微生物检测系统
J Clin Microbiol. 1979 Dec;10(6):823-33. doi: 10.1128/jcm.10.6.823-833.1979.

引用本文的文献

1
Biographical feature: Henry D. Isenberg, Ph.D.个人简介:亨利·D·伊森伯格博士
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Feb;53(2):370-2. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03373-14. Epub 2014 Dec 10.
3
Albert Balows, Ph.D.阿尔伯特·巴洛斯,博士
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 May;51(5):1356-8. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00590-13. Epub 2013 Mar 13.
4
Clinical microbiology: past, present, and future.临床微生物学:过去、现在与未来。
J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Mar;41(3):917-8. doi: 10.1128/JCM.41.3.917-918.2003.

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