MedElevator
Войти в исследования Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2025
Evaluation of swabbing methods for culture and non-culture-based recovery of multidrug-resistant organisms from environmental surfaces.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Babiker Ahmed, Van Riel Julia, Lohsen Sarah, Page Alex, Strudwick Amanda, Wilber Eli, Woodworth Michael, Satola Sarah
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Sponge-Sticks (SS) and ESwabs are frequently utilized for detection of multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) in the environment. Head-to-head comparisons of SS and ESwabs across recovery endpoints are limited.
DESIGN: We compared MDRO culture and non-culture-based recovery from (1) ESwabs, (2) cellulose-containing SS (CS), and (3) polyurethane-containing SS (PCS).
METHODS: Known quantities of each MDRO were pipetted on a stainless-steel surface and swabbed by each method. Samples were processed, cultured, and underwent colony counting. DNA was extracted from sample eluates, quantified, and underwent metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). MDROs underwent whole genome sequencing (WGS). MDRO recovery from paired patient perirectal and PCS-collected environmental samples from clinical studies was determined.
SETTING: Laboratory experiment, tertiary medical center, and long-term acute care facility.
RESULTS: Culture-based recovery varied across MDRO taxa, it was highest for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus and lowest for carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA). Culture-based recovery was significantly higher for SS compared to ESwabs except for CRPA, where all methods performed poorly. Nucleic acid recovery varied across methods and MDRO taxa. Integrated WGS and mNGS analysis resulted in successful detection of antimicrobial resistance genes, construction of high-quality metagenome-assembled genomes, and detection of MDRO genomes in environmental metagenomes across methods. In paired patient and environmental samples, multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MDRP) environmental recovery was notably poor (0/123), despite detection of MDRP in patient samples (20/123).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use of SS for the recovery of MDROs. Pitfalls of each method should be noted. Method selection should be driven by MDRO target and desired endpoint.
DESIGN: We compared MDRO culture and non-culture-based recovery from (1) ESwabs, (2) cellulose-containing SS (CS), and (3) polyurethane-containing SS (PCS).
METHODS: Known quantities of each MDRO were pipetted on a stainless-steel surface and swabbed by each method. Samples were processed, cultured, and underwent colony counting. DNA was extracted from sample eluates, quantified, and underwent metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). MDROs underwent whole genome sequencing (WGS). MDRO recovery from paired patient perirectal and PCS-collected environmental samples from clinical studies was determined.
SETTING: Laboratory experiment, tertiary medical center, and long-term acute care facility.
RESULTS: Culture-based recovery varied across MDRO taxa, it was highest for vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus and lowest for carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPA). Culture-based recovery was significantly higher for SS compared to ESwabs except for CRPA, where all methods performed poorly. Nucleic acid recovery varied across methods and MDRO taxa. Integrated WGS and mNGS analysis resulted in successful detection of antimicrobial resistance genes, construction of high-quality metagenome-assembled genomes, and detection of MDRO genomes in environmental metagenomes across methods. In paired patient and environmental samples, multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MDRP) environmental recovery was notably poor (0/123), despite detection of MDRP in patient samples (20/123).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the use of SS for the recovery of MDROs. Pitfalls of each method should be noted. Method selection should be driven by MDRO target and desired endpoint.