Fuller D D, Davis T E
Wishard Memorial Hospital, Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis, USA.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1997 Dec;29(4):219-25. doi: 10.1016/s0732-8893(97)00164-8.
We compared the BACTEC 9240 continuous-read instrument using Peds Plus/F, Lytic/F, Aerobic/F, and Anaerobic/F media (Becton Dickinson Diagnostic Instrument Systems, Sparks, MD) with and without fastidious organism supplement to conventional centrifugation preparation and plating for the recovery and speed of detection of microorganisms. A total of 908 sterile body fluid specimens were collected and processed, yielding 116 (13%) positive cultures. Of the 80 isolates considered clinically significant, 48 (60%) were recovered by both the BACTEC system and conventional culture, whereas 32 (40%) were recovered by BACTEC only. No clinically significant isolates were recovered only by conventional culture methods. The time to detection for isolates recovered from both sets was faster for BACTEC. It was found that BACTEC, with or without the addition of fastidious organisms supplement, exhibited improved sensitivity for the recovery of microorganisms.
我们将使用Peds Plus/F、Lytic/F、Aerobic/F和Anaerobic/F培养基(美国马里兰州斯帕克斯市贝克顿·迪金森诊断仪器系统公司)的BACTEC 9240连续读数仪器,在添加和不添加苛养菌补充剂的情况下,与传统的离心制备和平板接种方法进行比较,以评估微生物的回收率和检测速度。共收集并处理了908份无菌体液标本,获得116份(13%)阳性培养物。在80株被认为具有临床意义的分离株中,48株(60%)通过BACTEC系统和传统培养法均能检出,而32株(40%)仅通过BACTEC系统检出。没有分离株仅通过传统培养方法检出。对于两组均检出的分离株,BACTEC的检测时间更快。结果发现,无论是否添加苛养菌补充剂,BACTEC在微生物回收方面均表现出更高的灵敏度。