J Infect Dis. 1994 Jan;169(1):134-42. doi: 10.1093/infdis/169.1.134.
Typing methods in seven laboratories were compared for their ability to type reproducibly 200 strains of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, predominantly from patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). Methods included lipopolysaccharide (LPS) serotyping, phage susceptibility typing, bacteriocin production, pilin gene typing, and analysis by restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) with a probe upstream from the exotoxin A gene. The methods differed substantially in their capacity to identify unique typing patterns and to type each strain reproducibly on three occasions. For strains from patients with CF, the RFLP typing method had the greatest discriminatory power (30 unique patterns, 105 [70%] of 150 typed reproducibly). LPS serotyping appeared to be equivalent to RFLP typing for discriminating among P. aeruginosa strains from the environment and from clinical sources other than CF patients. RFLP analysis appears to be the best method for typing P. aeruginosa strains with rough LPS (such as from patients with CF). LPS serotyping appears preferable for other indications as it is simpler to perform.
对七个实验室的分型方法进行了比较，评估其对200株铜绿假单胞菌进行可重复分型的能力，这些菌株主要来自囊性纤维化（CF）患者。方法包括脂多糖（LPS）血清分型、噬菌体敏感性分型、细菌素产生、菌毛基因分型，以及使用外毒素A基因上游的探针通过限制性片段长度多态性（RFLP）进行分析。这些方法在识别独特分型模式以及在三个不同时间对每个菌株进行可重复分型的能力上存在很大差异。对于来自CF患者的菌株，RFLP分型方法具有最大的鉴别力（30种独特模式，150株可重复分型的菌株中有105株[70%]）。对于区分来自环境以及CF患者以外临床来源的铜绿假单胞菌菌株，LPS血清分型似乎与RFLP分型等效。RFLP分析似乎是对具有粗糙LPS的铜绿假单胞菌菌株（如来自CF患者的菌株）进行分型的最佳方法。由于操作更简单，LPS血清分型在其他情况下似乎更可取。
