Comparison of an Automated Ribotyping System to Restriction Endonuclease Analysis and Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis for Differentiating Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium Isolates
AUTOR(ES)
Price, Connie S.
FONTE
American Society for Microbiology
RESUMO
The RiboPrinter Microbial Characterization System was compared with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), restriction endonuclease analysis (REA), and epidemiological data for typing 45 vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) isolates. In 21 clinically related isolates, 90 to 100% were similar by PFGE and REA, but only 57% were similar by the RiboPrinter. In another eight clinically related isolates, three isolates similar by PFGE and REA were all unique by the RiboPrinter. In contrast, in 16 clinically unrelated isolates, the predominant RiboPrinter ribotype represented 50% of the strains, while the largest PFGE and REA clones represented less than 19% of the strains. These data suggest that the RiboPrinter is not reliable for VRE investigation.
ACESSO AO ARTIGO
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=130939Documentos Relacionados
- Improved Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis for Typing Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci
- Automated Ribotyping of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium Isolates
- Evaluation of Fluorescence-Based Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism Analysis for Molecular Typing in Hospital Epidemiology: Comparison with Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis for Typing Strains of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium
- Comparison of restriction endonuclease analysis, ribotyping, and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for molecular differentiation of Clostridium difficile strains.
- Random amplified polymorphic DNA typing versus pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for epidemiological typing of vancomycin-resistant enterococci.
