This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Wood, J C Articles by de la Maza, L M Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Wood, J C Articles by de la Maza, L M

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1985 November; 22(5): 789-792

Evaluation of Mycotrim-GU for isolation of Mycoplasma species and Ureaplasma urealyticum.

ABSTRACT

The Mycotrim-GU (Hana Biologics, Berkeley, Calif.) biphasic culture system and a conventional system were compared for their ability to detect Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma species in 100 clinical specimens. Both systems detected 18 Mycoplasma spp. isolates. The average colony detection time was 1.9 days with the Mycotrim-GU and 2.3 days with the conventional system. The Mycotrim-GU agar detected all 33 U. urealyticum isolates recovered in the study, and the conventional agar detected 31. In addition to the U. urealyticum isolates recovered from the agar, there were several specimens that, although they did not grow colonies on the agar, gave an alkaline broth change. Of these specimens, two were found with the conventional system and seven were found with the Mycotrim-GU. The average detection time of U. urealyticum colonies was 2.0 days for the conventional agar and 1.7 days for the Mycotrim-GU. The Mycotrim-GU offers several advantages over the conventional system: it is commercially available, consists of a one-flask system which is ready to use, has a significantly longer shelf life, and is cost competitive. This study showed the Mycotrim-GU to be an effective system for detecting the genital mycoplasmas.