Laboratory Medicine ›› 2015, Vol. 30 ›› Issue (5): 478-483.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8640.2015.05.017
Previous Articles Next Articles
ZHOU Yuechang1, REN Lina1, WANG Xuhui1, CHEN Jianwen3, CHEN Miaopei3, MAO Hongzhong3, HAN Lijie2
Received:
2014-10-31
Online:
2015-05-30
Published:
2015-06-17
CLC Number:
ZHOU Yuechang, REN Lina, WANG Xuhui, CHEN Jianwen, CHEN Miaopei, MAO Hongzhong, HAN Lijie. Comparison analysis of microbiological monitoring between hemodialysate and reverse osmosis water under different media[J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2015, 30(5): 478-483.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.shjyyx.com/EN/10.3969/j.issn.1673-8640.2015.05.017
细菌 | 培养基 | 观察时间 (h) | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
金黄色葡萄球菌 | EMB | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
72 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 2 | 19 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 2 | 20 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 4 | 29 | 0 | 4 | 23 | 0 | |
72 | 4 | 29 | 0 | 5 | 24 | 0 | ||
大肠埃希菌 | EMB | 48 | 3 | 24 | 0 | 2 | 18 | 0 |
72 | 3 | 25 | 0 | 2 | 20 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 23 | 0 | 2 | 16 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 23 | 1 | 2 | 16 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 5 | 32 | 0 | 5 | 29 | 0 | |
72 | 6 | 36 | 0 | 5 | 29 | 0 | ||
铜绿假单胞菌 | EMB | 48 | 4 | 17 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 0 |
72 | 4 | 19 | 0 | 1 | 19 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 2 | 21 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 22 | 0 | 3 | 23 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 6 | 31 | 0 | 4 | 32 | 0 | |
72 | 6 | 33 | 0 | 5 | 35 | 0 |
细菌 | 培养基 | 观察时间 (h) | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
金黄色葡萄球菌 | EMB | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
72 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 18 | 0 | 2 | 19 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 18 | 0 | 2 | 20 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 4 | 29 | 0 | 4 | 23 | 0 | |
72 | 4 | 29 | 0 | 5 | 24 | 0 | ||
大肠埃希菌 | EMB | 48 | 3 | 24 | 0 | 2 | 18 | 0 |
72 | 3 | 25 | 0 | 2 | 20 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 23 | 0 | 2 | 16 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 23 | 1 | 2 | 16 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 5 | 32 | 0 | 5 | 29 | 0 | |
72 | 6 | 36 | 0 | 5 | 29 | 0 | ||
铜绿假单胞菌 | EMB | 48 | 4 | 17 | 0 | 1 | 16 | 0 |
72 | 4 | 19 | 0 | 1 | 19 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 19 | 0 | 2 | 21 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 22 | 0 | 3 | 23 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 6 | 31 | 0 | 4 | 32 | 0 | |
72 | 6 | 33 | 0 | 5 | 35 | 0 |
细菌 | 培养基 | 观察时间 (h) | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
金黄色葡萄球菌 | EMB | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
72 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 33 | 0 | 6 | 40 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 35 | 0 | 15 | 48 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 3 | 22 | 0 | 5 | 66 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 31 | 0 | 10 | 66 | 0 | ||
大肠埃希菌 | EMB | 48 | 3 | 38 | 0 | 6 | 32 | 0 |
72 | 3 | 38 | 0 | 8 | 33 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 3 | 26 | 0 | 8 | 46 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 31 | 1 | 14 | 46 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 4 | 34 | 0 | 11 | 44 | 0 | |
72 | 4 | 35 | 0 | 14 | 44 | 0 | ||
铜绿假单胞菌 | EMB | 48 | 4 | 14 | 0 | 4 | 26 | 0 |
72 | 4 | 22 | 0 | 9 | 27 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 7 | 34 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 10 | 54 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 4 | 15 | 0 | 9 | 50 | 0 | |
72 | 4 | 24 | 0 | 12 | 61 | 0 |
细菌 | 培养基 | 观察时间 (h) | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
金黄色葡萄球菌 | EMB | 48 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
72 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 2 | 33 | 0 | 6 | 40 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 35 | 0 | 15 | 48 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 3 | 22 | 0 | 5 | 66 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 31 | 0 | 10 | 66 | 0 | ||
大肠埃希菌 | EMB | 48 | 3 | 38 | 0 | 6 | 32 | 0 |
72 | 3 | 38 | 0 | 8 | 33 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 3 | 26 | 0 | 8 | 46 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 31 | 1 | 14 | 46 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 4 | 34 | 0 | 11 | 44 | 0 | |
72 | 4 | 35 | 0 | 14 | 44 | 0 | ||
铜绿假单胞菌 | EMB | 48 | 4 | 14 | 0 | 4 | 26 | 0 |
72 | 4 | 22 | 0 | 9 | 27 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 7 | 34 | 0 | |
72 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 10 | 54 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 | 4 | 15 | 0 | 9 | 50 | 0 | |
72 | 4 | 24 | 0 | 12 | 61 | 0 |
培养基 | 观察 时间 | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
EMB | 48 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
72 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
7 d | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 h | 2 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 19 | 0 | |
72 h | 2 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 20 | 0 | ||
7 d | 2 | 13 | 0 | 4 | 21 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 h | 2 | 18 | 0 | 7 | 21 | 0 | |
72 h | 3 | 27 | 0 | 8 | 23 | 0 | ||
7 d | 3 | 27 | 0 | 8 | 25 | 0 |
培养基 | 观察 时间 | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
EMB | 48 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
72 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
7 d | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 h | 2 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 19 | 0 | |
72 h | 2 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 20 | 0 | ||
7 d | 2 | 13 | 0 | 4 | 21 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 h | 2 | 18 | 0 | 7 | 21 | 0 | |
72 h | 3 | 27 | 0 | 8 | 23 | 0 | ||
7 d | 3 | 27 | 0 | 8 | 25 | 0 |
培养基 | 观察 时间 | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
EMB | 48 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
72 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
7 d | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 h | 2 | 18 | 0 | 3 | 20 | 0 | |
72 h | 2 | 18 | 0 | 3 | 21 | 0 | ||
7 d | 2 | 20 | 0 | 3 | 23 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 h | 4 | 29 | 0 | 3 | 23 | 0 | |
72 h | 4 | 29 | 0 | 4 | 24 | 0 | ||
7 d | 4 | 32 | 0 | 4 | 24 | 0 |
培养基 | 观察 时间 | 模拟污染透析液菌落数 | 空白 | 模拟污染反渗水菌落数 | 空白 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | 60 CFU/mL | |||||
EMB | 48 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
72 h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
7 d | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
TSA | 48 h | 2 | 18 | 0 | 3 | 20 | 0 | |
72 h | 2 | 18 | 0 | 3 | 21 | 0 | ||
7 d | 2 | 20 | 0 | 3 | 23 | 0 | ||
TGEA | 48 h | 4 | 29 | 0 | 3 | 23 | 0 | |
72 h | 4 | 29 | 0 | 4 | 24 | 0 | ||
7 d | 4 | 32 | 0 | 4 | 24 | 0 |
[1] | CANAU B, BOSC JY, LERAY H, et al.Microbiological purity of dialysate for on-line substitution fluid preparation[J]. Nephrol Dial Transplant, 2000, 15(Suppl 2):21-30. |
[2] | TATTERSALL JE,WARD RA, EUDIAL Group.Online haemodiafiltration:definition, dose quantification and safety revisited[J]. Nephrol Dial Transplant,2013,28(3): 542-550. |
[3] | 魏媛媛, 马迎春. 透析用水及透析液的微生物检测[J]. 中国血液净化,2014,13(4):335-339. |
[4] | WARD DM. Hemodialysis water: an update on safety issues, monitoring,adverse clinical events[J]. ASAIO J,2004,50(6): Ⅹⅲ-Ⅹⅷ. |
[5] | 林明滢,王复德,王永卫.不同培养基测定菌落总数的比较[J].感控杂志,2001,11(5):289-298. |
[6] | REASONER DJ.Heterotrophic plate count methodology in the United States[J]. Int J Food Microbiol,2004,92(3):307-315. |
[7] | NYSTRAND R.Microbiology of water and fluids for hemodialysis[J]. J Chin Med Assoc,2008,71(5):223-229. |
[8] | PONTORIERO G, POZZONI P, ANDRULLI S, et al. The quality of dialysis water[J]. Nephrol Dial Transplant,2003,18(Suppl 7): ⅶ21-ⅶ25. |
[9] | SMEETS E, KOOMAN J, VAN DER SANDE F, et al. Prevention of biofilm formation in dialysis water treatment systems[J]. Kidney Int,2003,63(4):1574-1576. |
[10] | RAY J.Microbiological monitoring of dialysis water systems-which culture method[J]. J Ren Care,2007,33(2):66-69. |
[11] | JAMES R.Monitoring of dialysis water systems-is there a need for increased sampling[J]. EDTNA ERCA J,2006,32(2):74-77. |
[12] | NYSTRAND R.The microbial world and fluids in dialysis[J]. Biomed Instrum Technol,2008,42(2):150-159. |
[13] | JACKSON RW, OSBORNE K, BARNES G,et al.Multiregional evaluation of the SimPlate heterotrophic plate count method compared to the standard plate count agar pour plate method in water[J]. Appl Environ Microbiol,2000,66(1):453-454. |
[14] | 叶纯宜,林明滢,陈小妮,等.紫外线杀菌效能探讨[J].感控杂志,2005,15(5):293-300. |
[15] | ROTH VR, JARVIS WR.Outbreaks of infection and/or pyrogenic reactions in dialysis patients[J]. Semin Dial,2000,13(2):92-96. |
[16] | LEDEBO I, BLANKESTIJN PJ.Haemodiafiltration-optimal efficiency and safety[J]. NDT Plus,2010,3(1):8-16. |
[17] | ASCI G, TZ H, OZKAHYA M, et al.The impact of membrane permeability and dialysate purity on cardiovascular outcomes[J]. J Am Soc Nephrol,2013,24(6):1014-1023. |
[18] | NYSTRAND R.Official recommendations for quality of fluids in dialysis-the need for standardisation[J]. J Ren Care,2009,35(2): 74-81. |
[19] | AMATO RL.Water treatment for hemodialysis--updated to include the latest AAMI standards for dialysate(RD52: 2004) continuing[J]. Nephrol Nurs J, 2005,32(2):151-167. |
[20] | LAYMAN-AMATO R, CURTIS J, PAYNE GM.Water treatment for hemodialysis: an update[J]. Nephrol Nurs J,2013,40(5):383-404. |
[21] | FENDLEY DA, WARD RA.Dialysate quality: new standards require a new approach to compliance[J]. Semin Dial,2012,25(5):510-515. |
[22] | KAWASAKI T, UCHINO J, SHINODA T, et al.Guidance of technical management of dialysis water and dialysis fluid for the Japan Association for Clinical Engineering Technologists[J]. Blood Purif,2009,27(Suppl 1):41-49. |
[23] | KAWANISHI H, MASAKANE I, TOMO T.The new standard of fluids for hemodialysis in Japan[J]. Blood Purif,2009,27(Suppl 1):5-10. |
[24] | KAWANISHI H, AKIBA T, MASAKANE I, et al.Standard on microbiological management of fluids for hemodialysis and related therapies by the Japanese Society for Dialysis Therapy 2008[J].Ther Apher Dial,2009,13(2):161-166. |
[25] | WARD RA.New AAMI standards for dialysis fluids[J]. Nephrol News Issues,2011,25(13):33-36. |
[1] | DENG Chenxia, MEI Yanping, ZHANG Xia, HUANG Baoshan, TIAN Dan, CAO Mengting, HU Yongqi, LIN Yongping, TIAN Lijun. Depolymerization effect of optical platelet count on reversible platelet aggregation after blood collection [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(11): 1087-1090. |
[2] | LU Tingyan, GU Danfeng, WANG Yahong, GE Yafang, YANG Haiou. Evaluation of vaginal secretion routine determination modes and review criteria analysis [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(11): 1091-1097. |
[3] | . [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(11): 1098-1100. |
[4] | . [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(10): 983-986. |
[5] | . [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(9): 901-904. |
[6] | . [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(9): 905-908. |
[7] | CHENG Xu, YANG Cunqing, PANG Bo, GU Chun, HOU Xueyun, FEI Jiaxin, WU Min, LI Jun, LIU Guijian. Number and activity of peripheral blood eosinophils in obese people [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(9): 855-859. |
[8] | LEI Jing, MAN Qiuhong, ZHAO Renjia, ZHANG Tiejun, JIANG Yanfeng, XU Kelin, SUO Chen, CHEN Xingdong. Elevated red blood cell distribution width increasing the risk of heart failure:a cohort study based on the UK Biobank [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(9): 860-864. |
[9] | DUAN Lili, JIANG Chang, ZHOU Dongmei. Role of PLR in ankylosing spondylitis patients with positive antinuclear antibody [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(7): 669-674. |
[10] | XIA Yanyan, XIA Yongquan, SONG Guanghao, XIA Mao. Role of coagulation-related monitoring indicators in the course of rivaroxaban anticoagulation for acute venous thromboembolism in elderly patients [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(5): 475-478. |
[11] | CHEN Yi, WANG Jia, XU Zhiwei, ZHAI Yaping, XUAN Weixia. Effects of different anticoagulants on phagocytosis,activation and apoptosis of in vitro neutrophil function [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(5): 479-483. |
[12] | YANG Liyuan, DAI Wanqin, WANG Xiaotong, LOU Xiaoli, WANG Yue, HOU Yanqiang. Effect of peripheral blood neutrophils on interferon-gamma release assay of Mycobacterium tuberculosis [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(5): 484-488. |
[13] | . [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(5): 502-504. |
[14] | . [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2023, 38(1): 69-72. |
[15] | XIE Yuan, YI Wanwan, SHI Qiuyuan, LÜ Zhongwei, LIU Jin. Clinical value of thromboelastography and conventional coagulation tests in evaluating coagulation status of colon cancer and colon polyps [J]. Laboratory Medicine, 2022, 37(11): 1007-1011. |
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||