两种检测超广谱β内酰胺酶表型方法的比较
DOI:
作者:
作者单位:

作者简介:

陆燕春

通讯作者:

中图分类号:

R446.5

基金项目:

上海市浦东新区卫生局卫生科技发展专项基金资助(PW2011A-22)


Two methods for the detection of ESBL phenotypes
Author:
Affiliation:

Fund Project:

  • 摘要
  • |
  • 访问统计
  • |
  • 参考文献
  • |
  • 相似文献
  • |
  • 文章评论
    摘要:

    目的了解某医院临床产超广谱β内酰胺酶(ESBLs)细菌的耐药性与基因型,比较两种方法对ESBLs表型检测的效果。方法随机收集100株ESBLs阳性菌株(初筛试验阳性)为实验组,30株ESBLs阴性菌株(初筛试验阴性)为对照组。经Vitek2 Compact自动化系统鉴定细菌,纸片扩散法进行药敏试验;采用改良Hodge试验检测耐碳青霉烯类药物菌株;美国临床实验室标准化研究所(CLSI)推荐的ESBLs表型确证试验和利用3氨基苯酚硼酸改良的ESBLs表型确证试验进行表型检测;同时用聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测全部菌株的ESBLs基因。结果ESBLs初筛试验阳性菌株均耐头孢噻肟,但对碳青霉烯类药物仍敏感;2株耐碳青霉烯类药物的菌株,改良Hodge试验阳性。ESBLs基因检出率为84.00%,基因型以SHV和CTXM型为主。以PCR检测ESBLs基因结果为金标准,ESBLs表型确证试验和改良ESBLs表型确证试验的灵敏度、特异性、阴性预期值、阳性预期值分别为72.61%、100.00%、100.00%、66.67%和98.81%、100.00%、100.00%、97.87%,两种方法比较,差异有统计学意义(χ2=7.53,P=0.006)。结论ESBLs初筛试验阳性菌株对碳青霉烯类药物具有较高的敏感性。利用3氨基苯酚硼酸改良的ESBLs表型确证试验检测ESBLs表型,效果更好。

    Abstract:

    ObjectiveTo investigate antimicrobial resistance and genotypes of extendedspectrum βlactamases (ESBLs)producing strains isolated from clinic in a hospital, and to establish an effective method to analyze ESBL phenotypes.MethodsOne hundred ESBL positive isolates (initial screen test was positive) were randomly selected as experimental group, and 30 ESBL negative isolates (initial screen test was negative) was as control group. All strains were identified by Vitek2 Compact automatic system,and antimicrobial susceptibility test was performed by KirbyBauer disc diffusion method; Carbapenemresistant isolates were detected by modified Hodge test; βlactamase phenotypes were detected by both ESBL phenotypic confirmatory test recommended by Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute(CLSI) and modified ESBL confirmatory test incorporating 3aminophenylboronic acid; ESBL genes of all isolates were detected by PCR and DNA sequencing. ResultsESBL screen positive isolates were all resistant to cefotaxime, but susceptible to carbapenems; the modified Hodge tests were positive in two carbapenemresistant isolates. The detection rate of ESBL genes was 84.00%, the dominant genes were SHV and CTXM type. PCR detection for ESBL genes was regarded as a golden standard,and the sensitivity,specificity,negative predictive value, as well as positive predictive value of ESBL phenotype confirmatory test and modified ESBL phenotype confirmatory test was 72.61%, 100.00%, 100.00%, 66.67% and 98.81%,100.00%,100.00%, 97.87% respectively, the difference was significant (χ2=7.53, P=0.006). ConclusionESBL screen test positive isolates still have a high susceptible rate to carbapenems. ESBL phenotypes can be effectively detected by modified ESBL confirmatory test incorporating 3aminophenylboronic acid.

    参考文献
    相似文献
引用本文

严育忠,范惠清,徐英,等.两种检测超广谱β内酰胺酶表型方法的比较[J]. 中国感染控制杂志,2012,11(5):336-340.
YAN Yuzhong, FAN Huiqing, XU Ying, et al. Two methods for the detection of ESBL phenotypes[J]. Chin J Infect Control, 2012,11(5):336-340.

复制
分享
文章指标
  • 点击次数:
  • 下载次数:
  • HTML阅读次数:
  • 引用次数:
历史
  • 收稿日期:2012-01-20
  • 最后修改日期:2012-03-22
  • 录用日期:
  • 在线发布日期: 2012-09-30
  • 出版日期: