4.4 Article

Rapid Identification of Rectal Multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli Before Transrectal Prostate Biopsy

Journal

UROLOGY
Volume 86, Issue 6, Pages 1200-1205

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.008

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01AI106007]
  2. Department of Microbiology, University of Washington (National Institutes of Health) [R01AI106007]
  3. Department of Microbiology, University of Washington (Sokurenko lab) [75-5533]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE To develop and evaluate a rapid multiplex-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) to identify fecal carriers of multidrug-resistant extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli (MDR-ExPEC) clonal groups. METHODS Men presenting for transrectal prostate biopsy (TPB) at the San Diego Veterans Affairs Medical Center underwent rectal culture immediately before TPB. Rectal swabs were streaked onto ciprofloxacin-supplemented (4 mg/L) MacConkey agar plates, identified, and susceptibility tested. The same swab was sent to the University of Washington for qPCR test (EST200) targeting 2 major MDR-ExPEC clonal groups-ST131 and ST69-that combined were expected to represent majority of fluoroquinolone (FQ)- and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole-resistant E coli. We calculate test characteristics including the area under the receiver operative curve (AUC). RESULTS We enrolled 104 men from 11/5/2013 to 6/10/2014. FQ-resistant E coli were cultured from 19.2% (20/104) of rectal swabs, and 26% (27/104) of all swabs were positive for EST200 by PCR. The test characteristics comparing the EST200 to the culture-based detection of FQ resistance were 75%, 86%, 94%, and 56%, respectively. The AUC was 0.84 for the EST200 to detect FQ resistance before TPB. CONCLUSION Compared to the reference standard rectal culture, EST200 was able to detect majority of FQ-resistant E coli on rectal swabs before prostate biopsy. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available