Jorgensen J H, Mirrett S, McDonald L C, Murray P R, Weinstein M P, Fune J, Trippy C W, Masterson M, Reller L B
Department of Pathology, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio 78284-7750, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 1997 Jan;35(1):53-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.35.1.53-58.1997.
Blood specimens collected from adult patients with suspected sepsis in four medical centers were inoculated into BACTEC Plus/F and BacT/Alert FAN aerobic culture bottles. Both bottles of 7,401 bottle pairs contained the prescribed blood volume of 8 to 12 ml. Bottles were incubated in their respective instruments for a standard 7-day protocol or until the instruments signaled that they were positive. A total of 720 isolates that were judged to represent true infections were recovered from 338 patients; 451 isolates were recovered from both bottles, 143 were recovered from only the Plus/F bottle, and 126 were recovered from only the FAN bottle (P was not significant). Although more Histoplasma capsulatum isolates were recovered from Plus/F bottles (P < 0.005), there were no other statistically significant differences in recovery rates of individual species or groups of organisms between the two systems. Of 329 monomicrobic patient septic episodes, 244 episodes were detected by both blood culture systems, 40 were detected only by the BACTEC system, and 45 were detected only by the BacT/Alert system (P was not significant). There was no significant difference between the two systems in the detection of septic episodes among patients receiving antibiotic therapy at the time of blood cultures. Of the cultures found to be positive within the first 72 h of incubation, detection was on average earlier by the BACTEC system (16.9 h) than by the BacT/Alert system (18.7 h). Larger differences in average time to detection were seen with streptococci (10.7 h by the BACTEC system and 17.9 h by the BacT/Alert system) and yeasts (an average of 29.4 h by the BacT/Alert system versus 37.2 h by the BACTEC system). With the exception of the differences noted above, BACTEC Plus/F aerobic resin and BacT/Alert aerobic FAN blood culture bottles were comparable in their abilities to recover aerobic and facultative organisms.
从四个医疗中心疑似败血症的成年患者采集的血标本被接种到BACTEC Plus/F和BacT/Alert FAN需氧培养瓶中。7401对培养瓶中的两瓶均含有规定的8至12毫升血量。培养瓶在各自的仪器中按照标准的7天方案进行培养,或者直到仪器发出阳性信号。从338例患者中总共分离出720株被判定为代表真正感染的菌株;451株从两瓶中均分离出,143株仅从Plus/F瓶中分离出,126株仅从FAN瓶中分离出(P无统计学意义)。虽然从Plus/F瓶中分离出的荚膜组织胞浆菌菌株更多(P<0.005),但两个系统在单个菌种或生物体组的回收率方面没有其他统计学上的显著差异。在329例单微生物患者败血症发作中,两种血培养系统均检测到244例发作,仅BACTEC系统检测到40例,仅BacT/Alert系统检测到45例(P无统计学意义)。在血培养时接受抗生素治疗的患者中,两种系统在败血症发作的检测方面没有显著差异。在培养的前72小时内发现为阳性的培养物中,BACTEC系统的平均检测时间(16.9小时)比BacT/Alert系统(18.7小时)更早。链球菌(BACTEC系统为10.7小时,BacT/Alert系统为17.9小时)和酵母(BacT/Alert系统平均为29.4小时,BACTEC系统为37.2小时)的平均检测时间差异更大。除上述差异外,BACTEC Plus/F需氧树脂和BacT/Alert需氧FAN血培养瓶在恢复需氧和兼性生物体的能力方面具有可比性。