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 HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Chapin, K. Articles by Lauderdale, T. L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Chapin, K. Articles by Lauderdale, T. L.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 03 1996, 543-549, Vol 34, No. 3
Copyright © 1996 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Comparison of Bactec 9240 and Difco ESP blood culture systems for detection of organisms from vials whose entry was delayed

K Chapin and TL Lauderdale
Department of Pathology, University of South Alabama, Mobile, USA. Kchapin@jaguar1.usouthal.edu

A comparison of the Bactec 9240 (Becton-Dickinson, Sparks, Md.) and Difco ESP (Difco Laboratories, Detroit, Mich.) instruments for the detection of organism growth from vials whose entry was delayed was evaluated. The instruments' capabilities for organism recovery, time to detection, rates of false-positive results, and numbers of vials in which growth was not detected were made by using seeded blood culture vial pairs and controls with and without delayed entry. Bactec 9240 and Difco ESP aerobic and anaerobic vials were inoculated with human blood and were seeded with organism growth from 18 species, including obligate aerobic, anaerobic, and facultative anaerobic organisms. Each organism was tested in triplicate at 0, 8, 24, 36, and 48 h and was incubated at both room temperature (RT) and 35 degrees C. Two separate phases of the study were performed, each with a different version of Bactec 9240 software. Overall, detection of growth in vials with delayed entry into either the Bactec 9240 or the Difco ESP instrument resulted in an increased total time to detection with incubation at both RT and 35 degrees C compared with the total time to detection for nondelayed vials. However, false-positive results and vials in which growth was not detected were minimal, and delayed entry did not require routine entry or exit subcultures for either system. Analysis of individual time points and incubation temperatures for the detection of all organisms suggested that Difco ESP vials delayed by up to 8 h may be incubated at 35 degrees C (100% detection) and vials delayed for longer than 8 h may remain at RT. Bactec 9240 vials may be incubated at 35 degrees C for up to 24 h with a minimal loss of detection (97.9% detection), and vials delayed for more than 24 h should remain at RT for optimal recovery of organism growth.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Sautter, R. L., Bills, A. R., Lang, D. L., Ruschell, G., Heiter, B. J., Bourbeau, P. P. (2006). Effects of Delayed-Entry Conditions on the Recovery and Detection of Microorganisms from BacT/ALERT and BACTEC Blood Culture Bottles. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44: 1245-1249 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Seegmuller, I., Eschenbach, U., Kamereck, K., Miethke, T. (2004). Sensitivity of the BacT/ALERT FA-medium for detection of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in pre-incubated blood cultures and its temperature-dependence. J Med Microbiol 53: 869-874 [Abstract] [Full Text]