This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, M. L.
Right arrow Articles by Reller, L. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wilson, M. L.
Right arrow Articles by Reller, L. B.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 2001, p. 983-989, Vol. 39, No. 3
0095-1137/01/$04.00+0   DOI: 10.1128/JCM.39.3.983-989.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Controlled Clinical Comparison of BACTEC Plus Anaerobic/F to Standard Anaerobic/F as the Anaerobic Companion Bottle to Plus Aerobic/F Medium for Culturing Blood from Adults

Michael L. Wilson,1,2,* Stanley Mirrett,3 Frances T. Meredith,3,4,5 Melvin P. Weinstein,6,7,8 Vincenzo Scotto,8 and L. Barth Reller3,4,5

Department of Pathology and Laboratory Services, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado 802041; Department of Pathology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Denver, Colorado 802622; Clinical Microbiology Laboratory, Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital,6 and Departments of Pathology7 and Medicine,8 Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey 08901; and Clinical Microbiology Laboratory,3 and Departments of Pathology4 and Medicine,5 Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710

Received 26 July 2000/Returned for modification 7 November 2000/Accepted 29 December 2000

To determine the optimal anaerobic companion bottle to pair with BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F medium for recovery of pathogenic microorganisms from adult patients with bacteremia and fungemia, we compared Plus Anaerobic/F bottles with Standard Anaerobic/F bottles, each of which was filled with 4 to 6 ml of blood. The two bottles were paired with a Plus Aerobic/F bottle filled with 8 to 12 ml of blood. A total of 14,011 blood culture sets were obtained. Of these, 11,583 sets were received with all three bottles filled adequately and 12,257 were received with both anaerobic bottles filled adequately. Of 818 clinically important isolates detected in one or both adequately filled anaerobic bottles, significantly more staphylococci (P < 0.001), streptococci (P < 0.005), Escherichia coli isolates (P < 0.02), Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates (P < 0.005), and all microorganisms combined (P < 0.001) were detected in Plus Anaerobic/F bottles. In contrast, significantly more anaerobic gram-negative bacilli were detected in Standard Anaerobic/F bottles (P < 0.05). Of 397 unimicrobial episodes of septicemia, 354 were detected with both pairs, 30 were detected with Plus Aerobic/F-Plus Anaerobic/F pairs only, and 13 were detected with Plus Aerobic/F-Standard Anaerobic/F pairs only (P < 0.05). Significantly more episodes of bacteremia caused by members of the family Enterobacteriaceae (P < 0.05) and aerobic and facultative gram-positive bacteria (P < 0.025) were detected with Plus Anaerobic/F bottles only. In a paired-bottle analysis, 810 of 950 isolates were recovered from both pairs, 90 were recovered from Plus Aerobic/F-Plus Anaerobic/F pairs only, and 50 were recovered from Plus Aerobic/F-Standard Anaerobic/F pairs only (P < 0.001). Paired Plus Aerobic/F-Plus Anaerobic/F bottles yielded significantly more staphylococci (P < 0.001), streptococci (P < 0.05), and members of the family Enterobacteriaceae (P <0.001). We conclude that Plus Anaerobic/F bottles detect more microorganisms and episodes of bacteremia and fungemia than Standard Anaerobic/F bottles as companion bottles to Plus Aerobic/F bottles in the BACTEC 9240 blood culture system.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Department of Pathology and Laboratory Services, Mail Code #0224, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, CO 80204-4507. Phone: (303) 436-6434. Fax: (303) 436-6420. E-mail: mwilson{at}dhha.org.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, March 2001, p. 983-989, Vol. 39, No. 3
0095-1137/01/$04.00+0   DOI: 10.1128/JCM.39.3.983-989.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.


This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Mirrett, S., Petti, C. A., Woods, C. W., Magadia, R., Weinstein, M. P., Reller, L. B. (2004). Controlled Clinical Comparison of the BacT/ALERT FN and the Standard Anaerobic SN Blood Culture Medium. J. Clin. Microbiol. 42: 4581-4585 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Weinstein, M. P. (2003). Blood Culture Contamination: Persisting Problems and Partial Progress. J. Clin. Microbiol. 41: 2275-2278 [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»