Mirrett Stanley, Reller L Barth, Petti Cathy A, Woods Christopher W, Vazirani Bindu, Sivadas Rekha, Weinstein Melvin P
Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Duke University Medical Center, Departments of Pathology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2003 Jun;41(6):2391-4. doi: 10.1128/JCM.41.6.2391-2394.2003.
Standard aerobic media are widely used for culturing blood with the BacT/ALERT (BioMérieux, Inc., Durham, N.C.) (BM) and BACTEC 9240 (BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, Md.) (BD) automated continuously monitoring instrument systems. Although similarly composed of soybean-casein digest broths, the formulations of the standard aerobic media available for these instruments differ from each other in supplements and in sodium polyanetholesulfonate concentration. Therefore, we compared the standard aerobic media available for these systems at two university hospitals. Blood samples from adult patients with suspected bloodstream infection were inoculated at the bedside into nonvented BM and BD standard aerobic blood culture bottles and incubated in their respective instruments. The laboratories received 6,743 pairs of bottles that were each filled with 8 to 12 ml of blood. A total of 523 isolates representing true infections were recovered from 257 patients; of these isolates, 348 were recovered from both the BD and the BM bottles, 108 were recovered from the BM bottles only, and 67 were recovered from the BD bottles only (P < 0.005). More staphylococci (P < 0.05), especially coagulase-negative staphylococci (P < 0.05), and yeasts (P < 0.01) were recovered from BM bottles than from BD bottles. Of 291 unimicrobial episodes of bloodstream infection, 220 were detected with both bottles, 41 were detected with the BM bottles only, and 30 were detected with the BD bottles only (difference not significant). Among 335 cultures that were positive in both bottles within the first 72 h of incubation, the median times to detection were 14 h for BM bottles and 13 h for BD bottles. Rates for false-positive results were 0.5% for BM bottles and 0.1% for BD bottles. One BM bottle and seven BD bottles yielded false-negative results. We conclude that the BM medium provides improved recovery of microorganisms, especially staphylococci and yeasts, compared with that provided by the BD medium.
标准需氧培养基广泛用于使用BacT/ALERT(生物梅里埃公司,北卡罗来纳州达勒姆)(BM)和BACTEC 9240(BD诊断系统公司,马里兰州斯帕克斯)(BD)自动连续监测仪器系统培养血液。尽管这些标准需氧培养基同样由大豆酪蛋白消化肉汤组成,但可用于这些仪器的标准需氧培养基配方在补充成分和聚茴香脑磺酸钠浓度方面彼此不同。因此,我们在两家大学医院比较了可用于这些系统的标准需氧培养基。将疑似血流感染的成年患者的血样在床边接种到无通风口的BM和BD标准需氧血培养瓶中,并在各自的仪器中孵育。实验室收到了6743对瓶子,每对瓶子都装有8至12毫升血液。从257名患者中总共分离出523株代表真正感染的菌株;在这些分离株中,348株是从BD瓶和BM瓶中都分离出来的,108株仅从BM瓶中分离出来,67株仅从BD瓶中分离出来(P<0.005)。与BD瓶相比,从BM瓶中分离出的葡萄球菌(P<0.05),尤其是凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌(P<0.05)和酵母菌(P<0.01)更多。在291例单一微生物血流感染发作中,220例通过两个瓶子都检测到,41例仅通过BM瓶检测到,30例仅通过BD瓶检测到(差异不显著)。在孵育的前72小时内两个瓶子均呈阳性的335份培养物中,BM瓶的中位检测时间为14小时,BD瓶为13小时。BM瓶的假阳性结果率为0.5%,BD瓶为0.1%。一个BM瓶和七个BD瓶产生了假阴性结果。我们得出结论,与BD培养基相比,BM培养基能更好地回收微生物,尤其是葡萄球菌和酵母菌。