利用BD MAX™肠道细菌检测板检测直肠拭子中的粪便病原体。

Q2 Medicine BMC Clinical Pathology Pub Date : 2017-04-08 eCollection Date: 2017-01-01 DOI:10.1186/s12907-017-0043-2
Barbara DeBurger, Sarah Hanna, Eleanor A Powell, Cindi Ventrola, Joel E Mortensen
{"title":"利用BD MAX™肠道细菌检测板检测直肠拭子中的粪便病原体。","authors":"Barbara DeBurger,&nbsp;Sarah Hanna,&nbsp;Eleanor A Powell,&nbsp;Cindi Ventrola,&nbsp;Joel E Mortensen","doi":"10.1186/s12907-017-0043-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The BD MAX™ Enteric Bacterial Panel (BDM-EBP) is designed and FDA-cleared to detect <i>Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter,</i> and Shiga toxin genes <i>stx1/2</i> from stool samples. However, rectal swabs, which are not FDA-cleared for clinical testing with the BDM-EBP, are common specimens received from pediatric patients for enteric pathogen testing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of the BDM-EBP to detect stool pathogens from rectal swabs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Routine cultures, Shiga toxin testing, and molecular testing with BDM-EBP were performed on 272 sequential rectal swabs collected from August 2015 to December 2015. Discrepant test results were resolved using Verigene® Enteric Pathogens Nucleic Acid Test (EP). 36 challenge samples (13 <i>Salmonella</i> spp., 3 <i>Shigella</i> spp., 10 <i>Campylobacter</i> spp., and 10 Shiga toxin positive <i>Escherichia coli</i>) were tested using reference strains (American Type Culture Collection) and previous patient isolates diluted to10<sup>3</sup>-10<sup>4</sup> cfu/ml in saline then added to Sample Buffer Tube (SBT) with negative stool matrix delivered via a swab. Limit of detection testing was performed by serial 10 fold dilutions in saline then added to SBT with negative stool matrix provided via a swab.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 272 rectal swab specimens were evaluated and 89 were positive by culture and/or MAX EBP. All discrepant results were BDM-EBP positive and culture negative. 21 of 31 (68%) of the apparent false positive BDM-EBP discrepant results resolved as positive with Nanosphere's Verigene® EP. After resolution of the discordant results, the Positive Percent Agreement (PPA) and Negative Percent Agreement (NPA) are as follows for each target: <i>Salmonella</i> (<i>n</i> = 4) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA; <i>Shigella</i> (<i>n</i> = 79) 100%, PPA and 95.3%, NPA; <i>Campylobacter</i> (<i>n</i> = 4) 100%, PPA and 99.6%, NPA; and Shiga toxin producing organisms (<i>n</i> = 2) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA. 8.8% of the patient samples did not initially yield a result on the BDM-System. Upon repeat, half of the problematic samples resolved, and 4.4% of the total specimen tested did not yield a result. All organisms in the challenge samples were detected. Limits of detection for BDM-EBP testing of rectal swabs were as follows (in cfu/ml in SBT): <i>Salmonella</i>-1.44 × 10<sup>2</sup>; <i>Shigella</i>-5.10 × 10<sup>0</sup>; <i>Campylobacter</i>-1.51 × 10<sup>1</sup>; and Shiga Toxin-1.13 ×10<sup>3</sup>.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Rectal swabs are acceptable samples for detecting <i>Salmonella</i>, <i>Shigella</i>, <i>Campylobacter</i>, and Shiga toxin using BDM-EBP.</p>","PeriodicalId":35804,"journal":{"name":"BMC Clinical Pathology","volume":"17 ","pages":"7"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12907-017-0043-2","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Utilizing BD MAX™ Enteric Bacterial Panel to Detect Stool Pathogens from Rectal Swabs.\",\"authors\":\"Barbara DeBurger,&nbsp;Sarah Hanna,&nbsp;Eleanor A Powell,&nbsp;Cindi Ventrola,&nbsp;Joel E Mortensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12907-017-0043-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The BD MAX™ Enteric Bacterial Panel (BDM-EBP) is designed and FDA-cleared to detect <i>Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter,</i> and Shiga toxin genes <i>stx1/2</i> from stool samples. However, rectal swabs, which are not FDA-cleared for clinical testing with the BDM-EBP, are common specimens received from pediatric patients for enteric pathogen testing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of the BDM-EBP to detect stool pathogens from rectal swabs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Routine cultures, Shiga toxin testing, and molecular testing with BDM-EBP were performed on 272 sequential rectal swabs collected from August 2015 to December 2015. Discrepant test results were resolved using Verigene® Enteric Pathogens Nucleic Acid Test (EP). 36 challenge samples (13 <i>Salmonella</i> spp., 3 <i>Shigella</i> spp., 10 <i>Campylobacter</i> spp., and 10 Shiga toxin positive <i>Escherichia coli</i>) were tested using reference strains (American Type Culture Collection) and previous patient isolates diluted to10<sup>3</sup>-10<sup>4</sup> cfu/ml in saline then added to Sample Buffer Tube (SBT) with negative stool matrix delivered via a swab. Limit of detection testing was performed by serial 10 fold dilutions in saline then added to SBT with negative stool matrix provided via a swab.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 272 rectal swab specimens were evaluated and 89 were positive by culture and/or MAX EBP. All discrepant results were BDM-EBP positive and culture negative. 21 of 31 (68%) of the apparent false positive BDM-EBP discrepant results resolved as positive with Nanosphere's Verigene® EP. After resolution of the discordant results, the Positive Percent Agreement (PPA) and Negative Percent Agreement (NPA) are as follows for each target: <i>Salmonella</i> (<i>n</i> = 4) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA; <i>Shigella</i> (<i>n</i> = 79) 100%, PPA and 95.3%, NPA; <i>Campylobacter</i> (<i>n</i> = 4) 100%, PPA and 99.6%, NPA; and Shiga toxin producing organisms (<i>n</i> = 2) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA. 8.8% of the patient samples did not initially yield a result on the BDM-System. Upon repeat, half of the problematic samples resolved, and 4.4% of the total specimen tested did not yield a result. All organisms in the challenge samples were detected. Limits of detection for BDM-EBP testing of rectal swabs were as follows (in cfu/ml in SBT): <i>Salmonella</i>-1.44 × 10<sup>2</sup>; <i>Shigella</i>-5.10 × 10<sup>0</sup>; <i>Campylobacter</i>-1.51 × 10<sup>1</sup>; and Shiga Toxin-1.13 ×10<sup>3</sup>.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Rectal swabs are acceptable samples for detecting <i>Salmonella</i>, <i>Shigella</i>, <i>Campylobacter</i>, and Shiga toxin using BDM-EBP.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35804,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Clinical Pathology\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1186/s12907-017-0043-2\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Clinical Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12907-017-0043-2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Clinical Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12907-017-0043-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

背景:BDM-EBP是专为检测粪便样本中的沙门氏菌、志贺氏菌、弯曲杆菌和志贺氏毒素基因stx1/2而设计并获得fda批准的。然而,直肠拭子,不被fda批准用于BDM-EBP的临床测试,是儿科患者用于肠道病原体测试的常见标本。本研究的目的是评估BDM-EBP检测直肠拭子粪便病原体的能力。方法:对2015年8月~ 2015年12月收集的272份直肠拭子进行常规培养、志贺毒素检测和BDM-EBP分子检测。使用Verigene®肠道病原体核酸检测(EP)解决检测结果的差异。36份攻毒样本(13份沙门氏菌、3份志贺氏菌、10份弯曲杆菌和10份志贺氏毒素阳性的大肠杆菌)使用参考菌株(美国型培养收集)进行检测,之前的患者分离株在生理盐水中稀释至103-104 cfu/ml,然后加入样本缓冲管(SBT),阴性粪便基质通过拭子输送。检测极限试验是通过连续将生理盐水稀释10倍,然后加入SBT,通过拭子提供阴性粪便基质。结果:共对272例直肠拭子标本进行了评估,其中89例经培养和/或MAX EBP检测呈阳性。所有差异结果均为BDM-EBP阳性,培养阴性。31例明显假阳性BDM-EBP差异结果中有21例(68%)用Nanosphere的Verigene®EP解决为阳性。在解决不一致的结果后,每个目标的阳性百分比协议(PPA)和阴性百分比协议(NPA)如下:沙门氏菌(n = 4) 100%, PPA和100%,NPA;志贺氏菌(n = 79) 100%为PPA, 95.3%为NPA;弯曲杆菌(n = 4) 100%为PPA, 99.6%为NPA;和志贺毒素产生生物(n = 2) 100%, PPA和100%,NPA。8.8%的患者样本最初在bdm系统上没有产生结果。重复后,半数有问题的样品得到解决,4.4%的总样品测试没有产生结果。攻毒样品中的所有生物均被检测到。直肠拭子BDM-EBP检测的检出限如下(SBT中以cfu/ml计):沙门氏菌-1.44 × 102;志贺氏菌-5.10 × 100;弯曲杆菌-1.51 × 101;志贺毒素-1.13 ×103。结论:用BDM-EBP检测直肠拭子可用于沙门氏菌、志贺氏菌、弯曲杆菌和志贺氏毒素。
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
Utilizing BD MAX™ Enteric Bacterial Panel to Detect Stool Pathogens from Rectal Swabs.

Background: The BD MAX™ Enteric Bacterial Panel (BDM-EBP) is designed and FDA-cleared to detect Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, and Shiga toxin genes stx1/2 from stool samples. However, rectal swabs, which are not FDA-cleared for clinical testing with the BDM-EBP, are common specimens received from pediatric patients for enteric pathogen testing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of the BDM-EBP to detect stool pathogens from rectal swabs.

Methods: Routine cultures, Shiga toxin testing, and molecular testing with BDM-EBP were performed on 272 sequential rectal swabs collected from August 2015 to December 2015. Discrepant test results were resolved using Verigene® Enteric Pathogens Nucleic Acid Test (EP). 36 challenge samples (13 Salmonella spp., 3 Shigella spp., 10 Campylobacter spp., and 10 Shiga toxin positive Escherichia coli) were tested using reference strains (American Type Culture Collection) and previous patient isolates diluted to103-104 cfu/ml in saline then added to Sample Buffer Tube (SBT) with negative stool matrix delivered via a swab. Limit of detection testing was performed by serial 10 fold dilutions in saline then added to SBT with negative stool matrix provided via a swab.

Results: A total of 272 rectal swab specimens were evaluated and 89 were positive by culture and/or MAX EBP. All discrepant results were BDM-EBP positive and culture negative. 21 of 31 (68%) of the apparent false positive BDM-EBP discrepant results resolved as positive with Nanosphere's Verigene® EP. After resolution of the discordant results, the Positive Percent Agreement (PPA) and Negative Percent Agreement (NPA) are as follows for each target: Salmonella (n = 4) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA; Shigella (n = 79) 100%, PPA and 95.3%, NPA; Campylobacter (n = 4) 100%, PPA and 99.6%, NPA; and Shiga toxin producing organisms (n = 2) 100%, PPA and 100%, NPA. 8.8% of the patient samples did not initially yield a result on the BDM-System. Upon repeat, half of the problematic samples resolved, and 4.4% of the total specimen tested did not yield a result. All organisms in the challenge samples were detected. Limits of detection for BDM-EBP testing of rectal swabs were as follows (in cfu/ml in SBT): Salmonella-1.44 × 102; Shigella-5.10 × 100; Campylobacter-1.51 × 101; and Shiga Toxin-1.13 ×103.

Conclusion: Rectal swabs are acceptable samples for detecting Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, and Shiga toxin using BDM-EBP.

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
BMC Clinical Pathology
BMC Clinical Pathology Medicine-Pathology and Forensic Medicine
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: BMC Clinical Pathology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of histopathology, haematology, clinical biochemistry, and medical microbiology (including virology, parasitology, and infection control). BMC Clinical Pathology (ISSN 1472-6890) is indexed/tracked/covered by PubMed, CAS, EMBASE, Scopus and Google Scholar.
期刊最新文献
Epidemiological and histopathological profile of malignant melanoma in Malawi. Reference intervals for serum cystatin C and serum creatinine in an adult sub-Saharan African population. Clinical significance of HER2 and EGFR expression in colorectal cancer patients with ovarian metastasis. Accidental intoxications in toddlers: lack of cross-reactivity of vilazodone and its urinary metabolite M17 with drug of abuse screening immunoassays. HER2 overexpression and correlation with other significant clinicopathologic parameters in Ivorian breast cancer women.
×
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