MicroScan®组合面板增效与MicroScan®常规组合面板诊断革兰氏阴性和革兰氏阳性细菌性能的比较

Y. Uh, I. Jang, K. S. Lee, O. Kwon, K. Yoon
{"title":"MicroScan®组合面板增效与MicroScan®常规组合面板诊断革兰氏阴性和革兰氏阳性细菌性能的比较","authors":"Y. Uh, I. Jang, K. S. Lee, O. Kwon, K. Yoon","doi":"10.5145/KJCM.2009.12.4.193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: To access the clinical usefulness of MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels (Siemens, USA) for the identification and antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) of Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) and Gram-positive cocci (GPC), we compared MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels with MicroScanR conventional Combo Panels. Methods: One-hundred four isolates of GNB were simultaneously tested with MicroScanR Synergies plus Neg Combo Type 2 Panel (SINC2) and MicroScanR Neg Combo Panel Type 44 (NC44). One-hundred isolates of GPC were simultaneously tested with MicroScanR Synergies plus Pos Combo 3 Panel (SIPC3) and MicroScanR Pos Combo 1A (PC1A). Results: Of the GNB isolates, agreement rate of identification between SINC2 and NC44 were 92.3% to the species level and 93.3% to the genus level. Of the GPC isolates, agreement rate of identification between SIPC3 and PC1A were 85.0% to the species level and 100% to the genus level. Of the GNB isolates, agreement rate of AST according to antimicrobial agents between SINC2 and NC44 ranged from 86.5% to 100%. Among GPC isolates, agreement rate of AST according to antimicrobial agents between SIPC3 and PC1A were higher than 96.0% with the exception of gentamicin and quinupristin-dalfopristin. Conclusion: Compared with MicroScanR conventional Combo Panels (NC44, PC1A), MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels (SINC2, SIPC3) showed high agreement rate of identification and AST, and had the advantage of more rapid reporting. (Korean J Clin Microbiol 2009;12:193-200)","PeriodicalId":143093,"journal":{"name":"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the MicroScan® Combo Panel Synergies plus with the MicroScan® Conventional Combo Panel for Diagnostic Performance of Gram-negative and Gram-positive Bacteria\",\"authors\":\"Y. Uh, I. Jang, K. S. Lee, O. Kwon, K. Yoon\",\"doi\":\"10.5145/KJCM.2009.12.4.193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: To access the clinical usefulness of MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels (Siemens, USA) for the identification and antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) of Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) and Gram-positive cocci (GPC), we compared MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels with MicroScanR conventional Combo Panels. Methods: One-hundred four isolates of GNB were simultaneously tested with MicroScanR Synergies plus Neg Combo Type 2 Panel (SINC2) and MicroScanR Neg Combo Panel Type 44 (NC44). One-hundred isolates of GPC were simultaneously tested with MicroScanR Synergies plus Pos Combo 3 Panel (SIPC3) and MicroScanR Pos Combo 1A (PC1A). Results: Of the GNB isolates, agreement rate of identification between SINC2 and NC44 were 92.3% to the species level and 93.3% to the genus level. Of the GPC isolates, agreement rate of identification between SIPC3 and PC1A were 85.0% to the species level and 100% to the genus level. Of the GNB isolates, agreement rate of AST according to antimicrobial agents between SINC2 and NC44 ranged from 86.5% to 100%. Among GPC isolates, agreement rate of AST according to antimicrobial agents between SIPC3 and PC1A were higher than 96.0% with the exception of gentamicin and quinupristin-dalfopristin. Conclusion: Compared with MicroScanR conventional Combo Panels (NC44, PC1A), MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels (SINC2, SIPC3) showed high agreement rate of identification and AST, and had the advantage of more rapid reporting. (Korean J Clin Microbiol 2009;12:193-200)\",\"PeriodicalId\":143093,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5145/KJCM.2009.12.4.193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korean Journal of Clinical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5145/KJCM.2009.12.4.193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:为了获得MicroScanR Synergies + Combo Panels (Siemens, USA)在革兰氏阴性菌(GNB)和革兰氏阳性球菌(GPC)鉴定和药敏试验(AST)中的临床应用价值,我们将MicroScanR Synergies + Combo Panels与MicroScanR常规Combo panel进行了比较。方法:采用MicroScanR Synergies + Neg Combo Type 2 Panel (SINC2)和MicroScanR Neg Combo Panel Type 44 (NC44)同时检测104株GNB。采用MicroScanR Synergies + Pos Combo 3 Panel (SIPC3)和MicroScanR Pos Combo 1A (PC1A)同时检测100株GPC分离株。结果:在GNB分离株中,SINC2与NC44在种水平上的鉴定符合率为92.3%,在属水平上的鉴定符合率为93.3%。在GPC分离株中,SIPC3与PC1A在种水平上的鉴定符合率为85.0%,属水平上的鉴定符合率为100%。在GNB分离株中,SINC2与NC44对抗菌药物AST的符合率为86.5% ~ 100%。在GPC分离株中,SIPC3与PC1A对抗菌药物AST的符合率均高于96.0%,除庆大霉素和奎诺普司汀-达福普司汀外。结论:与MicroScanR常规Combo panel (NC44, PC1A)相比,MicroScanR Synergies + Combo panel (SINC2, SIPC3)具有较高的识别和AST符合率,且具有更快报告的优势。(中华临床微生物学杂志2009;12:193-200)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of the MicroScan® Combo Panel Synergies plus with the MicroScan® Conventional Combo Panel for Diagnostic Performance of Gram-negative and Gram-positive Bacteria
Background: To access the clinical usefulness of MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels (Siemens, USA) for the identification and antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) of Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) and Gram-positive cocci (GPC), we compared MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels with MicroScanR conventional Combo Panels. Methods: One-hundred four isolates of GNB were simultaneously tested with MicroScanR Synergies plus Neg Combo Type 2 Panel (SINC2) and MicroScanR Neg Combo Panel Type 44 (NC44). One-hundred isolates of GPC were simultaneously tested with MicroScanR Synergies plus Pos Combo 3 Panel (SIPC3) and MicroScanR Pos Combo 1A (PC1A). Results: Of the GNB isolates, agreement rate of identification between SINC2 and NC44 were 92.3% to the species level and 93.3% to the genus level. Of the GPC isolates, agreement rate of identification between SIPC3 and PC1A were 85.0% to the species level and 100% to the genus level. Of the GNB isolates, agreement rate of AST according to antimicrobial agents between SINC2 and NC44 ranged from 86.5% to 100%. Among GPC isolates, agreement rate of AST according to antimicrobial agents between SIPC3 and PC1A were higher than 96.0% with the exception of gentamicin and quinupristin-dalfopristin. Conclusion: Compared with MicroScanR conventional Combo Panels (NC44, PC1A), MicroScanR Synergies plus Combo Panels (SINC2, SIPC3) showed high agreement rate of identification and AST, and had the advantage of more rapid reporting. (Korean J Clin Microbiol 2009;12:193-200)
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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