Rosenblatt J E, Fallon A, Finegold S M
Appl Microbiol. 1973 Jan;25(1):77-85. doi: 10.1128/am.25.1.77-85.1973.
Five different anaerobic culture methods and several different media were compared for their ability to recover anaerobes from clinical specimens. Specimens were obtained from patients with documented infections, avoiding contamination with normal flora, and immediately placed in an anaerobic transporter. Each specimen was cultured by all methods and on all the various media. The comparative data indicate that anaerobic jars (GasPak and evacuation-replacement types) are just as effective in the recovery of clinically significant anaerobes as the more complex roll-tube and chamber methods employing prereduced media. Liquid media were disappointing as a "back-up" system but chopped-meat glucose was superior to two thioglycolate formulations. Growth of all anaerobes was poorer on selective media, but these media were very helpful in the workup of specimens containing mixed growth of anaerobic and facultative organisms. A variety of different anaerobes was isolated, but no very fastidious or extremely oxygen-sensitive organisms were recovered. This suggests that such organisms may not play a significant role in causing clinical infections.
对五种不同的厌氧培养方法和几种不同的培养基进行了比较,以评估它们从临床标本中分离厌氧菌的能力。标本取自已确诊感染的患者,避免被正常菌群污染,并立即放入厌氧转运器中。每个标本都采用所有方法并在所有不同的培养基上进行培养。比较数据表明,厌氧罐(GasPak型和抽空-置换型)在分离具有临床意义的厌氧菌方面与使用预还原培养基的更复杂的滚管法和厌氧箱法同样有效。作为“备用”系统,液体培养基效果不佳,但碎肉葡萄糖培养基优于两种硫乙醇酸盐配方。所有厌氧菌在选择性培养基上的生长较差,但这些培养基在处理含有厌氧菌和兼性菌混合生长的标本时非常有用。分离出了多种不同的厌氧菌,但未分离出非常苛求或对氧气极度敏感的微生物。这表明这类微生物可能在引起临床感染方面不起重要作用。