目的:比较传统结膜囊拭子采样(A)与雾化眼表微生物采样(B)的效果,一种新的微生物取样方法,检测眼部微生物感染。
方法:该研究包括眼科医院的61名参与者(122只眼),温州医科大学从12月起,2021年3月,2023年。参与者的每只眼睛首先用方法A进行采样,然后用方法B进行采样。对空气环境进行消毒,并作为空白空气控制样品取样。随后,撞击眼表的空气脉冲导致覆盖眼表的泪膜开裂并形成气溶胶。来自眼表的微生物附着于作为雾化眼表微生物产生的气溶胶,并通过生物气溶胶采样器作为受试者样品进行采样。收集样品并在25℃下孵育3-5天,在37℃下孵育24-48小时。通过基质辅助激光解吸/电离飞行时间质谱对菌落进行计数和鉴定。
结果:B组的准确率高于A组(45.8%vs.38.3%,P=0.289)。两种采样方法的结果之间存在轻微的一致性(k=0.031,P=0.730)。B组的敏感度高于A组(57.1%vs.35.7%,P=0.453)。B组的特异性结果高于A组(44.3%vs.38.7%,P=0.480)。在A组和B组中检测到12种和37种微生物,分别。
结论:与传统的拭子采样相比,新的雾化采样方法显示了更高的准确性和更全面的微生物检测;然而,它不能完全取代棉签取样。该新方法可以是一种新的有益策略和补充拭子采样以辅助诊断眼表感染。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effect of traditional conjunctival sac swab sampling (A) with aerosolization ocular surface microorganism sampling (B),a novel microbial sampling method, in detecting ocular microbial infection.
METHODS: The
study included 61 participants (122 eyes) enrolled at the Eye Hospital, Wenzhou Medical University from December, 2021 to March, 2023. Each eye of the participants underwent sampling first with method A then B.Before aerosolization sampling, the air environment was disinfected and sampled as blank air control sample. Subsequently, the air pulses impinging the ocular surface causes dehiscence of the tear film covering the ocular surface and aerosols are formed.The microorganisms from the ocular surface attach to the aerosols generated as aerosolization ocular surface microorganism and be sampled as subject sample by bio-aerosol sampler.The samples were collected and incubated at 25℃ for 3-5 days and 37℃ for 24-48 h.The colonies were counted and identified by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry.
RESULTS: The accuracy in Group B was higher than that in Group A (45.8% vs. 38.3%, P = 0.289). There was a slight level of agreement between the results from both the sampling methods (k = 0.031, P = 0.730). The sensitivity in Group B was higher than that in Group A (57.1% vs. 35.7%, P = 0.453). The specificity results in Group B was higher than that in Group A (44.3% vs. 38.7%, P = 0.480). There were 12 and 37 types of microbes detected in Groups A and B, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with traditional swab sampling, the novel aerosolization sampling method shows higher accuracy and more comprehensive detection of microbes; however, it cannot completely replace swab sampling. The novel method can be a novel conducive strategy and supplement swab sampling to auxiliary diagnose ocular surface infection.