...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Clinical Microbiology >Comparison of Two Multilocus Variable-Number Tandem-Repeat Methods and Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis for Differentiating Highly Clonal Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Isolates
【24h】

Comparison of Two Multilocus Variable-Number Tandem-Repeat Methods and Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis for Differentiating Highly Clonal Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Isolates

机译：两种多基因座可变数目串联重复方法和脉冲场凝胶电泳用于区分高抗甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌分离株的比较

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In the United Kingdom, EMRSA-15 and EMRSA-16 account for the majority (～90%) of nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections. Currently, the standard typing technique, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), is laborious and insufficient for discriminating between closely related subtypes of EMRSA-15 and -16. The objective of the present study was to compare the usefulness of multilocus variable-number tandem-repeat fingerprinting (MLVF) and multilocus variable-number tandem-repeat analysis (MLVA) with PFGE for subtyping these highly clonal MRSA lineages. A panel of 85 MRSA isolates (41 EMRSA-15, 20 EMRSA-16, and 24 MRSA isolates with diverse PFGE patterns) was investigated. In addition, a further 29 EMRSA-15s with identical PFGE patterns from two geographically linked but epidemiologically distinct outbreaks and several sporadic cases were analyzed. PFGE, MLVF, and MLVA resolved 66 (Simpson's index of diversity [SID] = 0.984), 51 (SID = 0.95), and 42 (SID = 0.881) types, respectively, among the 85 MRSA isolates. MLVF was more discriminatory than MLVA for EMRSA-15 and -16 strains, but both methods had comparable discriminatory powers for distinguishing isolates in the group containing diverse PFGE types. MLVF was comparable to PFGE for resolving the EMRSA-15s but had a lower discriminatory power for the EMRSA-16s. MLVF and MLVA resolved the 29 isolates with identical PFGE patterns into seven and six subtypes, respectively. Importantly, both assays indicated that the two geographically related outbreaks were caused by distinct subtypes of EMRSA-15. Taken together, the data suggest that both methods are suitable for identifying and tracking specific subtypes of otherwise-indistinguishable MRSA. However, due to its greater discriminatory power, MLVF would be the most suitable alternative to PFGE for hospital outbreak investigations.
机译：在英国，EMRSA-15和EMRSA-16占医院耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌（MRSA）感染的大部分（约90％）。当前，标准的分型技术脉冲场凝胶电泳（PFGE）费力且不足以区分EMRSA-15和-16的密切相关亚型。本研究的目的是比较多基因座可变数串联重复指纹分析（MLVF）和多基因座可变数串联重复分析（MLVA）与PFGE的作用，以分型这些高度克隆的MRSA谱系。研究了一组85种MRSA分离株（41种EMRSA-15、20种EMRSA-16和24种具有不同PFGE模式的MRSA分离株）。此外，还分析了来自两个地理上相互联系但在流行病学上不同的暴发和一些零星病例的另外29个具有相同PFGE模式的EMRSA-15。在85个MRSA分离物中，PFGE，MLVF和MLVA分别解析为66种类型（辛普森多样性指数[SID] = 0.984），51种（SID = 0.95）和42种（SID = 0.881）。对于EMRSA-15和-16菌株，MLVF比MLVA更具鉴别力，但是两种方法在区分不同PFGE类型的组中具有可比的鉴别力。 MLVF在解决EMRSA-15方面可与PFGE媲美，但对EMRSA-16的辨别力较低。 MLVF和MLVA将具有相同PFGE模式的29个分离株分别分为7个和6个亚型。重要的是，两种测定均表明这两次与地理相关的爆发是由EMRSA-15的不同亚型引起的。两者合计，数据表明这两种方法都适用于识别和跟踪在其他方面无法区分的MRSA的特定亚型。但是，由于MLVF具有更大的区分力，它将是PFGE医院暴发调查最适合的替代方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号