Suppr超能文献

用于儿科血培养的BacT/Alert FAN需氧瓶与Difco ESP 80A需氧瓶的比较。

Comparison of the BacT/Alert FAN aerobic and the Difco ESP 80A aerobic bottles for pediatric blood cultures.

作者信息

Welby-Sellenriek P L, Keller D S, Ferrett R J, Storch G A

机构信息

Edward Mallinckrodt Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1997 May;35(5):1166-71. doi: 10.1128/jcm.35.5.1166-1171.1997.

Abstract

We compared the BacT/Alert system using the aerobic FAN bottle with the ESP system using the 80A aerobic bottle for the detection of pediatric bloodstream pathogens at a children's hospital. From 6,636 blood culture sets complying with the inclusion criteria, 308 pathogens were detected, including 177 that were detected by both systems, 69 that were detected by BacT/Alert FAN only, and 62 that were detected by ESP 80A only (P = 0.6; not significant). BacT/Alert FAN detected more isolates of Staphylococcus aureus (47 versus 34; P = 0.02), while ESP 80A detected more episodes of streptococcal and enterococcal infection. BacT/Alert FAN detected more pathogens from patients receiving antibiotic therapy (107 versus 93; P = 0.04). Of 248 separate episodes of bacteremia or fungemia, 146 were detected by both systems, 56 were detected by ESP 80A only, and 46 were detected by BacT/Alert FAN only (P = 0.37; not significant). The median times to detection were 13.6 h for ESP 80A and 15.7 h for BacT/Alert FAN (P < 0.001). Both systems were considered easy to operate and were free from significant mechanical difficulties. False-positive or false-negative signals were rare or nonexistent with both systems. We conclude that both systems rapidly detect a broad range of pediatric bloodstream pathogens. BacT/Alert FAN provides better detection of Staphylococcus aureus, especially from patients receiving antibiotics. ESP 80A provides better detection of streptococci and enterococci.

摘要

我们在一家儿童医院比较了使用需氧FAN瓶的BacT/Alert系统和使用80A需氧瓶的ESP系统对儿童血流病原体的检测情况。在符合纳入标准的6636份血培养标本中,检测到308种病原体,其中177种由两种系统均检测到,69种仅由BacT/Alert FAN检测到,62种仅由ESP 80A检测到(P = 0.6;无显著性差异)。BacT/Alert FAN检测到更多的金黄色葡萄球菌分离株(47株对34株;P = 0.02),而ESP 80A检测到更多的链球菌和肠球菌感染病例。BacT/Alert FAN从接受抗生素治疗的患者中检测到更多的病原体(107株对93株;P = 0.04)。在248例单独的菌血症或真菌血症病例中,146例由两种系统均检测到,56例仅由ESP 80A检测到,46例仅由BacT/Alert FAN检测到(P = 0.37;无显著性差异)。ESP 80A的中位检测时间为13.6小时,BacT/Alert FAN为15.7小时(P < 0.001)。两种系统均被认为易于操作,且无明显机械故障。两种系统的假阳性或假阴性信号均很少见或不存在。我们得出结论,两种系统都能快速检测出多种儿童血流病原体。BacT/Alert FAN对金黄色葡萄球菌的检测效果更好,尤其是对接受抗生素治疗的患者。ESP 80A对链球菌和肠球菌的检测效果更好。

相似文献

8
Controlled clinical comparison of three commercial blood culture systems.三种商用血培养系统的对照临床比较
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1999 Apr;18(4):248-55. doi: 10.1007/s100960050272.

本文引用的文献

8
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.
9
Assessing the need for anaerobic medium for the recovery of clinically significant blood culture isolates in children.
Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1994 Mar;13(3):203-6. doi: 10.1097/00006454-199403000-00007.

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