Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Comparative Study | Journal Article | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Comparison of Isolator 1.5 and BACTEC NR660 aerobic 6A blood culture systems for detection of fungemia in children.

C A Petti, A K Zaidi, S Mirrett, L B Reller
C A Petti
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A K Zaidi
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S Mirrett
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L B Reller
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

The Isolator 1.5 microbial system (ISO 1.5) (Wampole Laboratories, Cranbury, N.J.) was compared with the BACTEC NR660 aerobic NR6A bottle (NR6A) (Becton Dickinson Diagnostic Instrument Systems, Sparks, Md.) for the detection of fungemia in hospitalized pediatric patients. For 4,825 paired blood cultures evaluated retrospectively from April 1992 to December 1994, at least one blood culture system was positive for 89 clinically important fungal isolates involved in 36 episodes of fungemia in 34 patients. Sixty isolates (44 Candida albicans, 12 Candida parapsilosis, and 4 Candida tropicalis isolates) were recovered from both systems, 13 were recovered from NR6A bottles only (10 C. albicans, 1 C. parapsilosis, and 2 Cryptococcus neoformans isolates), and 16 were recovered from ISO 1.5 tubes only (8 C. albicans and 5 C. parapsilosis isolates and 1 C. tropicalis, 1 Candida lusitaniae, and 1 Rhodotorula glutinis isolate) (P > 0.05). For the 60 Candida isolates from both systems, the mean time to detection was the same in each system. Thirty-seven isolates were detected by both systems on the same day, 9 isolates were detected earlier by NR6A, and 14 isolates were detected earlier by ISO 1.5 (P > 0.05). Of the 36 clinically important episodes of fungemia, 22 were detected by both systems (13 C. albicans isolates and 9 other Candida isolates), 4 were detected by NR6A only (3 C. albicans isolates and 1 C. neoformans isolate), and 10 were detected by ISO 1.5 only (3 C. albicans isolates, 6 other Candida isolates, and 1 R. glutinis isolate) (P > 0.05). Of the 22 episodes in which cultures from both systems were positive at some point during the episode, 12 were detected on the same day by both systems, 8 were detected earlier by NR6A, and 2 were detected earlier by ISO 1.5. Thus, for our pediatric population, NR6A is comparable to ISO 1.5 in both yield and time to detection of yeasts in fungemic patients.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Comparison of Isolator 1.5 and BACTEC NR660 aerobic 6A blood culture systems for detection of fungemia in children.
C A Petti, A K Zaidi, S Mirrett, L B Reller
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Aug 1996, 34 (8) 1877-1879; DOI:

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Clinical Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Comparison of Isolator 1.5 and BACTEC NR660 aerobic 6A blood culture systems for detection of fungemia in children.
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Comparison of Isolator 1.5 and BACTEC NR660 aerobic 6A blood culture systems for detection of fungemia in children.
C A Petti, A K Zaidi, S Mirrett, L B Reller
Journal of Clinical Microbiology Aug 1996, 34 (8) 1877-1879; DOI:
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JCM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • Editor Conflicts of Interest
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Resources for Clinical Microbiologists
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #JClinMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

 

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0095-1137; Online ISSN: 1098-660X