[1]黄媛媛,董建伟,戴清香,等.全自动血培养仪与微生物鉴定仪在临床血液检验中的应用效果[J].医学信息,2024,37(10):130-132140.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2024.10.027]
　HUANG Yuan-yuan,DONG Jian-wei,DAI Qing-xiang,et al.Application Effect of Automatic Blood Culture Instrument and Microbial Identification Instrument in Clinical Blood Test[J].Journal of Medical Information,2024,37(10):130-132140.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2024.10.027]
点击复制

全自动血培养仪与微生物鉴定仪在临床血液检验中的应用效果()
分享到：

医学信息[ISSN:1006-1959/CN:61-1278/R]

卷:
37卷
期数:
2024年10期
页码:
130-132140
栏目:
论著
出版日期:
2024-05-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Application Effect of Automatic Blood Culture Instrument and Microbial Identification Instrument in Clinical Blood Test
文章编号:
1006-1959（2024）10-0130-04
作者:
黄媛媛; 董建伟; 戴清香; 等
（上海市东方医院吉安医院检验科1，放疗科2，消化内科3，药剂科4，病理科5，上海 343000）
Author(s):
HUANG Yuan-yuan; DONG Jian-wei; DAI Qing-xiang; et al.
(Department of Laboratory1,Department of Radiotherapy2,Department of Gastroenterology3,Department of Pharmacy4,Department of Pathology5,Ji’an Hospital,Shanghai Oriental Hospital,Shanghai 343000,China)
关键词:
全自动血培养仪; 微生物鉴定仪; 血液检验; 诊断效能
Keywords:
Automatic blood culture instrument; Microbial identification instrument; Blood test; Diagnostic efficacy
分类号:
R44
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.1006-1959.2024.10.027
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的 研究全自动血培养仪与微生物鉴定仪在临床血液检验中的应用效果。方法 选取2021年1月-2023年1月我院行血液检验的80例患者为研究对象，所有血液样本均采用全自动血培养仪与微生物鉴定仪检验，观察不同检验方法间检验时间、检验成本、革兰阳性和阴性菌检出率，以及对血液微生物的检验诊断效能（灵敏度、特异度、准确率、阳性预测值、阴性预测值）。结果 全自动血培养仪检验时间短于微生物鉴定仪检验，检验成本低于微生物鉴定仪检验（P＜0.05）；全自动血培养仪检验革兰阳性菌检出率、阴性菌检出率与微生物鉴定仪比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）；全自动血培养仪检验对血液微生物的检验诊断灵敏度、特异度、准确率、阳性预测值、阴性预测值与微生物鉴定仪比较，差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。结论 全自动血培养仪与微生物鉴定仪在临床血液检验中均具有较高的诊断效能，但全自动血培养仪诊断耗时短、检验成本低、应用效率更高，临床可根据检验实际情况需求选择更合理的检验方式，以满足临床需求。
Abstract:
Objective To study the application effect of automatic blood culture instrument and microbial identification instrument in clinical blood test.Methods A total of 80 patients who underwent blood test in our hospital from January 2021 to January 2023 were selected as the research objects. All blood samples were tested by automatic blood culture instrument and microbial identification instrument. The test time, test cost, detection rate of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria between different test methods, and the test diagnostic efficiency of blood microorganisms (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, negative predictive value) were observed.Results The test time of automatic blood culture instrument was shorter than that of microbial identification instrument, and the test cost was lower than that of microbial identification instrument (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in the detection rate of gram-positive bacteria and negative bacteria between the automatic blood culture instrument and the microbial identification instrument (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value between the automatic blood culture instrument and the microbial identification instrument (P>0.05).Conclusion Automatic blood culture instrument and microbial identification instrument have high diagnostic efficiency in clinical blood test, but automatic blood culture instrument has short diagnosis time, low test cost and higher application efficiency. Clinically, more reasonable test methods can be selected according to the actual needs of the test to meet the clinical needs.

参考文献/References:

[1]刘琴,陈月,侯文静.基层医院血培养病原菌构成及耐药性分析[J].中国血液流变学杂志,2019,29(1):97-98.[2]张欣蕊,曹阳,王悦.医院血培养阳性病原菌的分布及其耐药性变迁[J].广东医学,2019,40(9):1272-1276.[3]尹玉瑶,王启,陈宏斌,等.评价BACTEC和BacT/Alert血培养系统对临床菌血症标本检测能力的回顾性研究[J].中华检验医学杂志,2017,40(4):303-308.[4]刘玉玲,司徒经伟,黎莉,等.945例血流感染的病原菌分布及药敏分析[J].检验医学与临床,2019,16(15):2147-2150.[5]王丽萍,金炎,邵春红,等.2016-2017年医院血流感染病原菌检出情况和报阳时间及主要菌株的耐药性分析[J].中国医药,2019,14(9):1415-1419.[6]常文娇,陈莉,戴媛媛,等.血液病患者血流感染病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J].临床输血与检验,2019,21(4):413-417.[7]蒋小燕,喻华,梁敏,等.2015-2017年四川省人民医院血培养病原菌分布及耐药性变迁[J].现代预防医学,2019,46(13):2455-2458.[8]Ertas G,Onaygil C,Akin Y,et al.Quantitative differentiation of breast lesions at 3T diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) using the ratio of distributed diffusion coefficient (DDC) [J].J Magn Reson Imaging,2016,44(6):1633-1641.[9]李定友.直接细菌鉴定与药敏试验在临床血液检验中的敏感性及准确性分析[J].质量安全与检验检测,2021,31(1):128-129.[10]贾琴妹,杨传莲,黄艳梅.VITEK-2 Compact全自动微生物鉴定仪与 VITEK MS质谱仪在摩根摩根菌鉴定中的应用及评价[J].疾病监测,2020,35(11):1025-1030.[11]周淑燕,柳丽娟,卓传尚,等.梅里埃MALDI-TOF-MS 系统与VITEK 2 Compact全自动微生物鉴定仪对临床常见病原菌鉴定的一致性分析[J].现代检验医学杂志,2020,35(2):92-96.[12]李林生.血液涂片细胞形态学联合全自动血细胞分析仪在血常规检验中的应用研究[J].医学信息,2020,33(1):174-175.[13]Ma C,Liu L,Li J,et al.Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) measurements in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A preliminary study of the effect of region of interest on ADC values and interobserver variability[J].J Magn Reson Imaging,2016,43(2):407-413.[14]唐恩波,解翠花.手工和全自动仪器血培养结果的分析[J].国际检验医学杂志,2016,37(15):2163-2165.[15]袁欢欢,公冶晨霞,李元叶,等.血液肿瘤患者医院感染病原菌特点及危险因素分析[J].中国消毒学杂志,2022,39(4):290-293.[16]荣兰香,马淑红,曹忠帅,等.2015年至2020年无菌体液病原菌分布及耐药性分析[J].中国实验诊断学,2021,25(12):1815-1817.[17]龚兴旺,周永,白梅,等.应用全自动血培养仪提高血液、无菌体液培养阳性率的临床观察[J].黔南民族医专学报,2018,28(1):32-33.[18]欧阳贵平,谢香萍,陈有华.两台全自动血细胞分析仪新鲜血白细胞分类检测结果直接比对的可行性分析[J].实验与检验医学,2020,38(2):260-262,276.[19]孟芝君,梁红萍,郭慧芳,等.血培养阳性标本病原菌分布与药敏性分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志,2018,25(3):559-561.

更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01