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 Weckbach, L S Articles by Staneck, J L Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Weckbach, L S Articles by Staneck, J L

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1986 April; 23(4): 700-703

Performance characteristics of a commercially prepared biphasic blood culture bottle.

ABSTRACT

A biphasic blood culture bottle (BiPB: GIBCO Laboratories, North Andover, Mass.) with an architectural design that physically separates the agar slant from the broth was compared with a conventional vented monophasic bottle (MPB-A) for use in the routine culture of blood. Both bottles contained tryptic soy broth. Tryptic soy agar was used for the BiPB slant. A third unvented bottle (MPB-N) with Columbia broth was included as part of the blood culture set. Of 3,537 sets collected, 444 were positive; 57 of these 444 sets were positive by virtue of an exclusively positive anaerobic bottle. Both BiPB and MPB-A were positive in 235 of the remaining 387 positive sets. A total of 521 isolates was recovered during the study. Of these isolates, 252 were recovered in both the BiPB and the MPB-A from the same set; 105 isolates grew in the BIPB but not in MPB-A, 95 isolates grew only in the MPB-A but not in BiPB, and 69 grew exclusively in the MPB-N. The BiPB allowed more rapid recovery of Candida spp., J-K diphtheroids, Pseudomonas spp. Making BiPB subcultures was easy enough to permit both early and daily subculture, which provided isolated colonies sooner than could be done by using the MPB-A. Isolated colonies and, therefore, identification and susceptibility results were available at least 1 day earlier for the BiPB isolates in approximately 50% of instances when both the BiPB and the MPB-A were positive. Staphylococcus epidermidis and streptococci were recovered more frequently in the BiPB, while gram-positive anaerobes were detected at a significantly (P less than 0.025) more frequent rate in the MPB-A than in the BiPB. Either bottle, however, should be used in conjunction with an anaerobic bottle for optimal recovery of anaerobic bacteria.