Hartstein A I, Phelps C L, Kwok R Y, Mulligan M E
Division of Infectious Diseases, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis 46202, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 1995 Aug;33(8):2022-6. doi: 10.1128/jcm.33.8.2022-2026.1995.
We evaluated test discriminatory power and DNA type alterations among methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains by testing 199 sequential isolates from 39 patients collected over 30 to 228 days. Isolates were typed by one or three different methods (restriction endonuclease analysis of plasmid DNA [REAP] with or without pulsed-field gel electrophoresis of genomic DNA [PFGE] and immunoblotting [IB]). REAP was highly discriminatory compared with PFGE and IB. However, the initial isolates from 4 of the 39 patients lacked detectable plasmid DNA and could not be typed by REAP. Typing of individual patient isolates showed that a different REAP type was identified only once every 138 days. Among 25 comparisons, seven sequential isolate pairs demonstrating REAP differences were also different by PFGE and IB. This likely represented the presence of more than one strain. Eighteen other pairs with REAP differences were identical or related to one another by PFGE and IB typing, and 17 of these differences were likely caused by a single genetic alteration within the same strain or clone. The rate of PFGE differences explicable by single genetic alterations among sequential isolates identical by REAP was similar to the overall rate for REAP differences in the whole collection. We conclude that REAP and PFGE typing differences explicable by single genetic alterations are relatively infrequent but not rare. These isolates should be examined by alternative typing systems to further support or refute clonality.
我们通过检测39例患者在30至228天内收集的199株连续分离株,评估了耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌菌株之间的检测鉴别力和DNA类型改变。分离株通过一种或三种不同方法进行分型(质粒DNA的限制性内切酶分析[REAP],伴有或不伴有基因组DNA的脉冲场凝胶电泳[PFGE]以及免疫印迹[IB])。与PFGE和IB相比,REAP具有高度鉴别力。然而,39例患者中有4例的初始分离株缺乏可检测到的质粒DNA,无法通过REAP进行分型。对个体患者分离株的分型显示,每138天仅能鉴定出一种不同的REAP类型。在25次比较中,七对连续分离株对显示出REAP差异,同时在PFGE和IB检测中也存在差异。这可能代表存在不止一种菌株。其他18对具有REAP差异的分离株在PFGE和IB分型中彼此相同或相关,其中17种差异可能是由同一菌株或克隆内的单一基因改变引起的。通过REAP鉴定相同的连续分离株中,由单一基因改变引起的PFGE差异率与整个收集样本中REAP差异的总体率相似。我们得出结论,由单一基因改变引起的REAP和PFGE分型差异相对较少但并非罕见。这些分离株应通过替代分型系统进行检测,以进一步支持或反驳克隆性。