TABLE 3.
Comparison of discriminatory power of MIRU-VNTR typing versus IS6110-PGRS RFLP typing in relation to epidemiological data
| Epidemiological link between clustered patients (transmission group) | IS6110 clusters involveda | No. of patients | No. of IS6110-PGRS clusters | No. (%) of IS6110-PGRS clusters split by MIRU-VNTR typing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evident link (TG1 and TG2) | 1-23, 36 | 57 | 24 | 1 (4.2) |
| Likely link (TG3) | 15-35, 37, 38 | 54 | 23 | 3 (13) |
| No link established (TG4) | 36-42 | 14 | 7 | 5 (71.4) |
a
See Fig. 1 for designated cluster numbers.
b
Isolates from a total of 125 patients were examined.