Suppr超能文献

迪夫科ESP、万波隔离器和贝克顿·迪金森Septi-Chek需氧血培养系统的临床比较。

Clinical comparison of difco ESP, Wampole isolator, and Becton Dickinson Septi-Chek aerobic blood culturing systems.

作者信息

Cockerill F R, Torgerson C A, Reed G S, Vetter E A, Weaver A L, Dale J C, Roberts G D, Henry N K, Ilstrup D M, Rosenblatt J E

机构信息

Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1996 Jan;34(1):20-4. doi: 10.1128/jcm.34.1.20-24.1996.

Abstract

The ESP 80A aerobic blood culture of the ESP automated blood culture system (Difco Laboratories. Detroit, Mich.) was compared with two manual aerobic blood culture systems, the Isolator (Wampole Laboratories, Cranbury, N.J.) and the Septi-Chek (Becton Dickinson, Cockeysville, Md.) systems, for the detection of bloodstream microorganisms from 5,845 blood samples for culture collected from adult patients with suspected septicemia. The bottles were incubated for 7 days, and the sediment from the Isolator tube was inoculated onto solid medium and this medium was incubated for 72 h. A total of 609 microorganisms were recovered from 546 blood cultures. There was no statistically significant difference in the total recovery of microorganisms for the ESP 80A system when compared with that for the Septi-Chek system (P = 0.083); however, the Isolator system recovered significantly more microorganisms overall than either the ESP 80A (P < 0.001) or the Septi-Chek (P < 0.001) system. When assessing individual probable pathogens, the Isolator system detected statistically significantly more Staphylococcus aureus and Candida spp. than either the ESP 80A or the Septi-Chek system (P < 0.05). Similarly, the Isolator system detected statistically significantly more bloodstream infections (septic episodes) caused by S. aureus and Candida spp. than either the ESP 80A or the Septi-Chek system (P < 0.05). In blood culture sets which produced growth of the same probable pathogens in the ESP 80A and the Isolator systems, there was no statistically significant difference in the median times to detection for all pathogens combined (P = 0.067). However, a similar comparison showed the Isolator and the ESP 80A systems to have statistically significantly shorter median detection times for all pathogens combined (P < 0.001) when they were independently compared with the Septi-Chek system. The ESP 80A system had 29 (0.5%) false-positive signals. The ESP system required less processing time than the Isolator system and eliminates the hands-on time for the detection of positive cultures required by the manual systems.

摘要

将ESP自动化血培养系统(迪福公司,密歇根州底特律)的ESP 80A需氧血培养与两种手动需氧血培养系统,即隔离器系统(万波实验室,新泽西州克兰伯里)和Septi-Chek系统(贝克顿·迪金森公司,马里兰州科基斯维尔)进行比较,以检测从疑似败血症成年患者采集的5845份血样中的血流微生物。培养瓶孵育7天,将隔离器管中的沉淀物接种到固体培养基上,并将该培养基孵育72小时。从546份血培养物中总共分离出609种微生物。与Septi-Chek系统相比,ESP 80A系统在微生物总回收率方面无统计学显著差异(P = 0.083);然而,隔离器系统总体上回收的微生物明显多于ESP 80A系统(P < 0.001)或Septi-Chek系统(P < 0.001)。在评估单个可能的病原体时,隔离器系统检测到的金黄色葡萄球菌和念珠菌属在统计学上明显多于ESP 80A或Septi-Chek系统(P < 0.05)。同样,隔离器系统检测到的由金黄色葡萄球菌和念珠菌属引起的血流感染(败血症发作)在统计学上明显多于ESP 80A或Septi-Chek系统(P < 0.05)。在ESP 80A系统和隔离器系统中培养出相同可能病原体的血培养组中,所有病原体合并后的中位检测时间无统计学显著差异(P = 0.067)。然而,类似的比较表明,与Septi-Chek系统单独比较时,隔离器系统和ESP 80A系统在所有病原体合并后的中位检测时间在统计学上显著更短(P < 0.001)。ESP 80A系统有29个(0.5%)假阳性信号。ESP系统比隔离器系统所需的处理时间更少,并且消除了手动系统检测阳性培养物所需的实际操作时间。

相似文献

10
Detection of bacteremia by Difco ESP blood culture system.使用Difco ESP血培养系统检测菌血症
J Clin Microbiol. 1994 Mar;32(3):811-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.32.3.811-818.1994.

引用本文的文献

7
Update on detection of bacteremia and fungemia.菌血症和真菌血症检测的最新进展。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 1997 Jul;10(3):444-65. doi: 10.1128/CMR.10.3.444.

本文引用的文献

2
Detection of bacteremia by Difco ESP blood culture system.使用Difco ESP血培养系统检测菌血症
J Clin Microbiol. 1994 Mar;32(3):811-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.32.3.811-818.1994.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验