TABLE 4.

Typeabilities and DIs of chromosomal restriction-based techniques (ribotyping and PFGE) determined with data from selected studies

Technique	Authors (reference no.)	No. of unrelated patients	Typeabilitya	No. of typesb	DI
HaeIII ribotyping	Owen et al. (47)	28	25/28	23	0.99
	Owen et al. (49)	93	77/93	78	0.98
	Owen et al. (51)	13	8/13	9	0.87
	Owen et al. (50)	17	13/17	14	0.95
	Prewett (53)	15	11/15	12	0.94
	Georgopoulos et al. (24)	18	13/18	14	0.93
	Salaün et al. (58)	39	28/39	29	0.92
	Burucoa et al. (this study)	40	30/40	31	0.94
	Pooled results		205/263 (78)		0.94
HindIII ribotyping	Owen et al. (48)	46	46/46	18	0.90
	Tee et al. (68)	107	107/107	77	0.99
	Marshall et al. (40)	29	29/29	15	0.94
	Rautelin et al. (54)	11	11/11	8	0.94
	Salaün et al. (58)	39	39/39	25	0.94
	Pooled results		232/232 (100)		0.92
NotI PFGE	Taylor et al. (66)	30	25/30	25	0.98
	Takami et al. (64)	24	12/24	12	0.76
	Takami et al. (65)	24	15/24	15	0.87
	Wada et al. (73)	16	9/16	9	0.82
	Hirschl et al. (27)	18	12/18	12	0.90
	Salama et al. (57)	20	15/20	15	0.95
	Pooled results		88/132 (66)		0.88
NruI PFGE	Taylor et al. (66)	30	19/30	19	0.87
	Hirschl et al. (27)	18	3/18	3	0.31
	Salama et al. (57)	20	13/20	13	0.89
	Pooled results		35/68 (51)		0.73
ApaI PFGE	Wada et al. (73)	16	9/16 (56)	9	0.82
KpnI PFGE	Wada et al. (73)	16	2/16 (12.5)	2	0.24

^aData indicate number of typeable isolates/total number of isolates tested (percent). 

^bNontypeable isolates were grouped together in one type.