Direct Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus from Blood Cultures Using Three Non-Molecular Methods: PBP2a Latex Agglutination, PBP2a Rapid Immunochromatographic Assay and MRSA-Chromogenic Medium

S. Hong, B. Son, K. Shin
{"title":"Direct Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus from Blood Cultures Using Three Non-Molecular Methods: PBP2a Latex Agglutination, PBP2a Rapid Immunochromatographic Assay and MRSA-Chromogenic Medium","authors":"S. Hong, B. Son, K. Shin","doi":"10.5145/KJCM.2012.15.1.27","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: This study compared three non-molecular methods for the detection of methicillin-resistance directly from blood cultures containing Staphylococcus aureus: penicillin-binding protein (PBP) 2a latex agglutination (LA), PBP2a immunochromatographic assay (ICA) and MRSA chromogenic medium (CM). Methods: Fifty methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and 50 methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) were seeded into blood-culture bottles. When isolates returned a positive signal, 5 mL of culture was added to serum separator tubes and centrifuged at 1,300 g for 10 min. The pellets were then used as the inoculum for the PBP2a LA, MRSA-CM and PBP2a ICA. The pure colony was used for PBP2a LA test, additionally. Results: The respective sensitivities and specificities were 98 and 100% for PBP2a ICA, and 100 and 100% for MRSA-CM in direct detection of MRSA from positive blood culture. The results of PBP2a LA test using pure colony were entirely compatible with those by mecA gene PCR but the PBP2a LA test using the pellets directly isolated from positive blood culture showed sometimes ambiguous agglutination; its sensitivity and specificity were 78 and 100%, if ambiguous results were scored as negative, and were 90 and 92%, if ambiguous results were scored as positive, respectively. Conclusion: For direct detection of MRSA in positive blood culture, MRSA-CM and PBP2a ICA provided excellent results. The PBP2a LA test using pure colony also gave excellent results but the PBP2a LA test by the direct method using pellet of positive blood culture was slightly less sensitive than the other two methods. (Korean J Clin Microbiol 2012;15:27-31)","PeriodicalId":143093,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5145/KJCM.2012.15.1.27","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: This study compared three non-molecular methods for the detection of methicillin-resistance directly from blood cultures containing Staphylococcus aureus: penicillin-binding protein (PBP) 2a latex agglutination (LA), PBP2a immunochromatographic assay (ICA) and MRSA chromogenic medium (CM). Methods: Fifty methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and 50 methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) were seeded into blood-culture bottles. When isolates returned a positive signal, 5 mL of culture was added to serum separator tubes and centrifuged at 1,300 g for 10 min. The pellets were then used as the inoculum for the PBP2a LA, MRSA-CM and PBP2a ICA. The pure colony was used for PBP2a LA test, additionally. Results: The respective sensitivities and specificities were 98 and 100% for PBP2a ICA, and 100 and 100% for MRSA-CM in direct detection of MRSA from positive blood culture. The results of PBP2a LA test using pure colony were entirely compatible with those by mecA gene PCR but the PBP2a LA test using the pellets directly isolated from positive blood culture showed sometimes ambiguous agglutination; its sensitivity and specificity were 78 and 100%, if ambiguous results were scored as negative, and were 90 and 92%, if ambiguous results were scored as positive, respectively. Conclusion: For direct detection of MRSA in positive blood culture, MRSA-CM and PBP2a ICA provided excellent results. The PBP2a LA test using pure colony also gave excellent results but the PBP2a LA test by the direct method using pellet of positive blood culture was slightly less sensitive than the other two methods. (Korean J Clin Microbiol 2012;15:27-31)
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
采用PBP2a胶乳凝集、PBP2a快速免疫层析和mrsa显色培养基三种非分子方法直接检测血培养物中耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌
背景:本研究比较了金黄色葡萄球菌血培养物中直接检测甲氧西林耐药性的三种非分子方法:青霉素结合蛋白(PBP) 2a胶乳凝集法(LA)、PBP2a免疫层析法(ICA)和MRSA显色培养基(CM)。方法:将50株耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)和50株甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)分别植入血培养瓶中。当分离物返回阳性信号时,将5 mL培养物加入血清分离管中,在1300 g下离心10分钟。然后将微球用作PBP2a LA, MRSA-CM和PBP2a ICA的接种物。另外,采用纯菌落进行PBP2a LA试验。结果:PBP2a ICA直接检测阳性血培养中MRSA的敏感性和特异性分别为98和100%,MRSA- cm直接检测MRSA的敏感性和特异性分别为100和100%。纯菌落法检测PBP2a LA的结果与mecA基因PCR的结果完全一致,但直接从阳性血培养中分离的微球进行PBP2a LA检测,有时会出现不明确的凝集;若结果不明确为阴性,其敏感性为78%,特异性为100%;若结果不明确为阳性,其敏感性为90%,特异性为92%。结论:直接检测阳性血培养的MRSA, MRSA- cm和PBP2a ICA具有较好的效果。采用纯菌落法检测PBP2a LA的结果也很好,但采用阳性血培养颗粒直接法检测PBP2a LA的灵敏度略低于其他两种方法。(中华临床微生物杂志2012;15:27-31)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diversity of Integrons Carrying blaVIM-2 Cassette in Pseudomonas spp. and Acinetobacter spp. A Case of Diabetic Foot Ulcer Caused by Arcanobacterium haemolyticum and Streptococcus agalactiae Haemophilus parainfluenzae Infective Endocarditis Confirmed by 16S rRNA Sequence Analysis from Culture Negative Tissue An Unusual Feature of Malaria: Exflagellated Microgametes of Malarial Parasites in Human Peripheral Blood Lung Abscess and Bacteremia Caused by Neisseria flavescens and Streptococcus sanguis in Patient with Idiopathic Hypereosinophilic Syndrome
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1