N von Allmen, K Gorzelniak, O Liesenfeld, M Njoya, J Duncan, E M Marlowe, T Hartel, A Knaust, B Hoppe, M Walter
{"title":"液体和干拭子用于培养和pcr检测入院筛查期间耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌的定植。","authors":"N von Allmen, K Gorzelniak, O Liesenfeld, M Njoya, J Duncan, E M Marlowe, T Hartel, A Knaust, B Hoppe, M Walter","doi":"10.1556/1886.2019.00022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (MRSA) colonization status facilitates isolation and decolonization and reduces MRSA infections. Liquid but not dry swabs allow fully automated detection methods. However, the accuracy of culture and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using liquid and dry swabs has not been analyzed. We compared different swab collection systems for routine nasal-throat MRSA screening in patients admitted to a tertiary care trauma center in Germany. Over 3 consecutive months, dry swabs (month 1), ESwabs (month 2), or MSwabs (month 3) were processed using Cepheid GeneXpert, Roche cobas and BD-MAX™ MRSA tests compared to chromogenic culture. Among 1680 subjects, the MRSA detection rate using PCR methods did not differ significantly between dry swabs, ESwab, and MSwab (6.0%, 6.2%, and 5.3%, respectively). Detection rates using chromogenic culture were 2.9%, 3.9%, and 1.9%, using dry, ESwab, and MSwab, respectively. Using chromogenic culture as the \"gold standard\", negative predictive values for the PCR tests ranged from 99.2-100%, and positive predictive values from 33.3-54.8%. Thus, efficient and accurate MRSA screening can be achieved using dry, as well as liquid E- or MSwab, collection systems. Specimen collection using ESwab or MSwab facilitates efficient processing for chromogenic culture in full laboratory automation while also allowing molecular testing in automated PCR systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":11929,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology","volume":"9 4","pages":"131-137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1556/1886.2019.00022","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Liquid and Dry Swabs for Culture- and PCR-Based Detection of Colonization with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus during Admission Screening.\",\"authors\":\"N von Allmen, K Gorzelniak, O Liesenfeld, M Njoya, J Duncan, E M Marlowe, T Hartel, A Knaust, B Hoppe, M Walter\",\"doi\":\"10.1556/1886.2019.00022\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (MRSA) colonization status facilitates isolation and decolonization and reduces MRSA infections. Liquid but not dry swabs allow fully automated detection methods. However, the accuracy of culture and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using liquid and dry swabs has not been analyzed. We compared different swab collection systems for routine nasal-throat MRSA screening in patients admitted to a tertiary care trauma center in Germany. Over 3 consecutive months, dry swabs (month 1), ESwabs (month 2), or MSwabs (month 3) were processed using Cepheid GeneXpert, Roche cobas and BD-MAX™ MRSA tests compared to chromogenic culture. Among 1680 subjects, the MRSA detection rate using PCR methods did not differ significantly between dry swabs, ESwab, and MSwab (6.0%, 6.2%, and 5.3%, respectively). Detection rates using chromogenic culture were 2.9%, 3.9%, and 1.9%, using dry, ESwab, and MSwab, respectively. Using chromogenic culture as the \\\"gold standard\\\", negative predictive values for the PCR tests ranged from 99.2-100%, and positive predictive values from 33.3-54.8%. Thus, efficient and accurate MRSA screening can be achieved using dry, as well as liquid E- or MSwab, collection systems. Specimen collection using ESwab or MSwab facilitates efficient processing for chromogenic culture in full laboratory automation while also allowing molecular testing in automated PCR systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11929,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology\",\"volume\":\"9 4\",\"pages\":\"131-137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1556/1886.2019.00022\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1556/1886.2019.00022\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Microbiology & Immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/1886.2019.00022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Liquid and Dry Swabs for Culture- and PCR-Based Detection of Colonization with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus during Admission Screening.
Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonization status facilitates isolation and decolonization and reduces MRSA infections. Liquid but not dry swabs allow fully automated detection methods. However, the accuracy of culture and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using liquid and dry swabs has not been analyzed. We compared different swab collection systems for routine nasal-throat MRSA screening in patients admitted to a tertiary care trauma center in Germany. Over 3 consecutive months, dry swabs (month 1), ESwabs (month 2), or MSwabs (month 3) were processed using Cepheid GeneXpert, Roche cobas and BD-MAX™ MRSA tests compared to chromogenic culture. Among 1680 subjects, the MRSA detection rate using PCR methods did not differ significantly between dry swabs, ESwab, and MSwab (6.0%, 6.2%, and 5.3%, respectively). Detection rates using chromogenic culture were 2.9%, 3.9%, and 1.9%, using dry, ESwab, and MSwab, respectively. Using chromogenic culture as the "gold standard", negative predictive values for the PCR tests ranged from 99.2-100%, and positive predictive values from 33.3-54.8%. Thus, efficient and accurate MRSA screening can be achieved using dry, as well as liquid E- or MSwab, collection systems. Specimen collection using ESwab or MSwab facilitates efficient processing for chromogenic culture in full laboratory automation while also allowing molecular testing in automated PCR systems.