ライフサイエンスコーパス: BACTEC

1 teremia was always significantly shorter for BACTEC.

2 ntification of acid-fast isolates growing in BACTEC 12B and 13A liquid media.

3 Herrold's egg yolk medium [HEY]) and liquid (Bactec 12B and para-JEM) culture media.

4 ained smears were prepared from 666 positive BACTEC 12B bottles and examined for the presence or abse

5 l isolates using culture fluid from positive BACTEC 12B bottles.

6 Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) in BACTEC 12B broth cultures of respiratory specimens was e

7 bacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC) in 125 BACTEC 12B broth cultures with positive growth indices.

8 sh or frozen aliquots of broth from positive BACTEC 12B cultures of respiratory specimens.

9 The BACTEC 12B liquid culture system was used but was supple

10 used to detect Mycobacterium tuberculosis in BACTEC 12B medium cultures when they first gave a growth

11 he same tissues tested by PCR using modified BACTEC 12B medium failed to grow M. avium subsp. paratub

12 luation of the presence of cord formation in BACTEC 12B medium is reliable and permits the rapid pres

13 Serpentine cord formation in BACTEC 12B medium was evaluated as a rapid method for th

14 The Bactec 12B medium was the superior medium of the three e

15 sing a common lot of microdilution trays and BACTEC 12B medium, pH 6.8; strains were tested once on t

16 1.50% NaOH for 15 min followed by culture in Bactec 12B medium.

17 To compare the performance of the BACTEC 13A (Becton Dickinson, Sparks, Md.), BACTEC MYCO/

18 LERT MB, followed by BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC and BACTEC 13A and then ISOLATOR 10.

19 tube (whose sediment was inoculated into the BACTEC 13A bottle) only.

20 tube (whose sediment was inoculated into the BACTEC 13A bottle).

21 0 days; and sediment from Isolator tube in a BACTEC 13A bottle, 42 days.

22 and Sabouraud dextrose agar (SDA) and into a BACTEC 13A bottle.

23 em (IS) for the recovery of fungi and to the BACTEC 13A medium for the recovery of mycobacteria.

24 standard manual ISOLATOR 10 and radiometric BACTEC 13A systems.

25 O/F LYTIC for 33 of 340 pairs, 14.1 days for BACTEC 13A versus 11.6 days for BacT/ALERT MB for 38 of

26 ve adequately paired sets were 15.3 days for BACTEC 13A versus 12.8 days for MYCO/F LYTIC for 33 of 3

27 /ALERT MB for 38 of 380 pairs, 12.6 days for BACTEC 13A versus 20.0 days for ISOLATOR 10 for 26 of 26

28 +/- 1 ml) sets from which MAC was recovered, BACTEC 13A was positive for 19 (73%), BACTEC MYCO/F LYTI

29 By BACTEC, 4 patients were persistently positive on days 90

30 ts were compared to those obtained using the BACTEC 460 (BD, Sparks, MD) radiometric method and a bro

31 an time until detection of 10.1 days for the BACTEC 460 and 14.2 days for the MB/BacT (P = 0.009).

32 levofloxacin concentrations of 2 microg/ml (BACTEC 460 and BACTEC MGIT 960) and 1 microg/ml (AP) inh

33 levofloxacin in the two newer test systems (BACTEC 460 and BACTEC MGIT 960), media containing subinh

34 The BACTEC 460 and the MB/BacT detected M. gordonae in four

35 The data suggest that the BACTEC 460 and the MGIT systems are approximately equiva

36 We found the MB/BacT to be comparable to the BACTEC 460 for mycobacterial detection.

37 utum was collected for quantitative culture, Bactec 460 liquid culture, and mRNA analysis throughout

38 In comparison with the previously described BACTEC 460 M. paratuberculosis counting method, quantifi

39 panel and the JustOne strip agreed with the BACTEC 460 method for 64/71 isolates (90%).

40 and ethambutol were compared to those of the BACTEC 460 method, and discrepant results were checked b

41 ed to 10.5 days (range, 7 to 16 days) by the BACTEC 460 method.

42 are favorably with those of the MGIT 960 and BACTEC 460 methods.

43 The BACTEC 460 radiometric mycobacterial broth culture syste

44 spite the documented enhanced ability of the BACTEC 460 radiometric mycobacterial culture system to r

45 hod, agar proportion (AP), the commonly used BACTEC 460 radiometric system, and the newer BACTEC MGIT

46 uspensions using standard plate counting and BACTEC 460 results as reference methods.

47 The overall agreement between the LRP and BACTEC 460 results was 98.5%.

48 ibiotic supplement kit was compared with the BACTEC 460 system (BACTEC 460) in a test of 488 specimen

49 These systems offer advantages over the BACTEC 460 system including the lack of a need for radio

50 ed by MABA and the results obtained with the BACTEC 460 system were 87.9% for initial results and 93.

51 es, and 2 of 4 SM-resistant isolates (by the BACTEC 460 system).

52 ed with the BACTEC MGIT 960, followed by the BACTEC 460 TB (271, or 75%) and solid media (250, or 69%

53 ional solid media; the number recovered with BACTEC 460 TB plus solid media was 128 (97%), that recov

54 nal mycobacterial culture performed with the BACTEC 460 TB system and Middlebrook 7H11 biplates.

55 f the isolates was also determined using the Bactec 460 TB system and the Wayne test.

56 were inoculated into the BACTEC MGIT 960 and BACTEC 460 TB systems, as well as onto Lowenstein-Jensen

57 lid media was 121 (92%), that recovered with BACTEC 460 TB was 119 (90%) and that recovered with all

58 147 (85%) for BACTEC MGIT 960, 123 (72%) for BACTEC 460 TB, and 106 (62%) for all solid media combine

59 tems were 8.1% for BACTEC MGIT 960, 4.9% for BACTEC 460 TB, and 21.1% for all solid media combined.

60 ere 14.4 days for BACTEC MGIT, 15.2 days for BACTEC 460 TB, and 24.1 days for solid media.

61 10.0 days for BACTEC MGIT 960, 10.4 days for BACTEC 460 TB, and 25.9 days for solid media.

62 tified by both systems was 11.9 days for the BACTEC 460 versus 13.7 days for the MB/BacT (P = 0.046).

63 m tuberculosis isolates were detected by the BACTEC 460 versus 23 isolates by the MB/BacT.

64 kit was compared with the BACTEC 460 system (BACTEC 460) in a test of 488 specimens submitted for myc

65 test concentrations were determined for AP, BACTEC 460, and BACTEC MGIT 960 methods.

66 (n = 88), and concordance values between the Bactec 460, the Wayne test, or pncA gene Sanger sequenci

67 ex (MTC) and compared to identification with BACTEC 460.

68 kansasii isolates were recovered only by the BACTEC 460.

69 was 7.0% for the MB/BacT versus 4.1% for the BACTEC 460.

70 ns by the MB/BacT versus 10 specimens by the BACTEC 460.

71 weeks of incubation was only 2.8 or 8.4% in BACTEC-460 (for a GI of 10 or 500) but 17.7% in MB Redox

72 e evaluated in comparison to the radiometric BACTEC-460 semiautomated system for recovery of Mycobact

73 ulture-positive specimens, occurred with the BACTEC-460 system (92.2%), followed by the MB Redox tube

74 spite these differences in comparison to the BACTEC-460 system and some differences between the MGIT

75 ems presents a reasonable alternative to the BACTEC-460 system, especially for laboratories with a li

76 tion was observed also among the cultures in BACTEC-460: a mean of 12 days to a growth index (GI) of

77 with casein) and by macrodilution using the BACTEC 460TB and 12B media at pH 6.8 and 7.3 to 7.4.

78 es determined to be resistant to EMB by both BACTEC 460TB and AP methods were almost always resistant

79 eakpoints, was 100% for all strains with the BACTEC 460TB method (both drugs and both pH values) and

80 s could not be confirmed as resistant by the BACTEC 460TB method or by repeat testing with the AP met

81 Results from isolates tested by the BACTEC 460TB method with an EMB concentration of 3.75 mi

82 that the AP method is more accurate than the BACTEC 460TB method, laboratories should not report EMB

83 trains, borderline results obtained with the BACTEC 460TB method, the presence of microcolonies deter

84 reading schedules are based on the standard BACTEC 460TB PZA protocol.

85 The BACTEC 460TB PZA susceptibility test for Mycobacterium t

86 hould not report EMB monoresistance based on BACTEC 460TB results alone.

87 pared with those obtained with the reference BACTEC 460TB system combined with standard DNA sequencin

88 Half of isolates determined by BACTEC 460TB to be resistant were determined to be susce

89 was 100% for all strains and both drugs when BACTEC 460TB was used, regardless of the pH of the mediu

90 romycin and azithromycin (the latter only by BACTEC 460TB, pH 6.8).

91 s method requires greater expertise than the BACTEC 460TB.

92 bottles had no growth detected; 50 from the Bactec (5 aerobic and 45 anaerobic) and 15 from the BacT

93 red with BACTEC 9240 (15 cultures) than with BACTEC 9050 (4 cultures).

94 ten with BACTEC 9240 (58 cultures) than with BACTEC 9050 (43 cultures), but false-negative cultures w

95 < 0.01) with BACTEC 9240 (35.0 h) than with BACTEC 9050 (61.4 h).

96 red with BACTEC 9240 (11 cultures) than with BACTEC 9050 (8 cultures).

97 of organisms and time to detection with the BACTEC 9050 and BACTEC 9240 systems were compared in a m

98 difference in the recovery of organisms with BACTEC 9050 compared with BACTEC 9240.

99 niae which was isolated more frequently with BACTEC 9050.

100 , more false-negative cultures occurred with BACTEC 9240 (11 cultures) than with BACTEC 9050 (8 cultu

101 3) more false-positive signals occurred with BACTEC 9240 (15 cultures) than with BACTEC 9050 (4 cultu

102 which were recovered earlier (P < 0.01) with BACTEC 9240 (35.0 h) than with BACTEC 9050 (61.4 h).

103 se-positive signals occurred more often with BACTEC 9240 (58 cultures) than with BACTEC 9050 (43 cult

104 The systems evaluated were the BACTEC 9240 (Bactec) and BacT/ALERT 3D (BacT).

105 RT (BioMerieux, Inc., Durham, N.C.) (BM) and BACTEC 9240 (BD Diagnostic Systems, Sparks, Md.) (BD) au

106 The Bactec 9240 and the BacT/Alert blood culture systems wer

107 In a previous study which evaluated the BACTEC 9240 automated blood culture system (Becton Dicki

108 We studied the ability of the BACTEC 9240 automated blood culture system to detect sim

109 da growth detection and time to detection in BACTEC 9240 automated systems.

110 he reliability of MYCO/F Lytic medium in the BACTEC 9240 blood culture system was evaluated by compar

111 The BACTEC 9240 blood culture system with a standard aerobic

112 , a liquid medium developed for use with the BACTEC 9240 blood culture system, was compared to the Is

113 ion bottles to Plus Aerobic/F bottles in the BACTEC 9240 blood culture system.

114 ity of the BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle and the BACTEC 9240 instrument (Becton Dickinson Diagnostic Inst

115 were analyzed for bacterial growth using the BACTEC 9240 instrument and for the bacterial 16S rRNA ge

116 e combination of MYCO/F Lytic medium and the BACTEC 9240 instrument is an excellent blood culture sys

117 ated monitoring of bottles for growth by the BACTEC 9240 instrument.

118 t instrument false positives signaled by the BACTEC 9240 system are not due to bacteria in the blood

119 The BACTEC 9240 system detected growth of most Candida isola

120 incubation protocol was instituted with the BACTEC 9240 system for a 1-year period to determine the

121 le and then incubated at 35 degrees C in the BACTEC 9240 system.

122 d time to detection with the BACTEC 9050 and BACTEC 9240 systems were compared in a multicenter evalu

123 of organisms with BACTEC 9050 compared with BACTEC 9240.

124 and susceptibility testing was performed in Bactec 960 MGIT.

125 IT 960 instrument using the 21-day protocol (Bactec 960 pyrazinamide [PZA] protocol).

126 e extraction of a single tooth, with LyF and BACTEC aerobic cultures taking 78 and 30.5 h, respective

127 Pathogen recovery in BacT/Alert FA Plus and Bactec Aerobic/F blood culture bottles containing antibi

128 from resin-containing BacT/Alert FA Plus and Bactec Aerobic/F blood culture bottles.

129 n which quantitative AFB microscopy replaced BACTEC also performed adequately (R = 0.58).

130 at a bottle (BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F bottle or BACTEC Anaerobic Lytic/10 bottle) culture was positive b

131 e, the BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F bottle, and the BACTEC Anaerobic Lytic/10 bottle.

132 silosis (yellow fluorescence), was tested on Bactec and BacT/Alert blood culture bottles which signal

133 typically <26 h, and no differences between Bactec and BacT/Alert bottles were observed.

134 The systems evaluated were the BACTEC 9240 (Bactec) and BacT/ALERT 3D (BacT).

135 ee methods, agar proportion (AP), BACTEC460 (Bactec), and MGIT-960 (MGIT), yielded overall agreement

136 ement by methods was 91.3% for AP, 93.0% for Bactec, and 82.6% for MGIT and by drugs was 92.2% for IN

137 dia from three different manufacturers (ESP, BACTEC, and BacT/Alert) were included in the study.

138 ulture, acid-fast smear, days-to-positive by BACTEC, and Mycobacterium tuberculosis antigen 85 comple

139 Trek Diagnostic Systems, Westlake, Ohio) and BACTEC (BD Biosciences, Sparks, Md.) test systems.

140 od, termed "Blood-mCIM," was evaluated using Bactec blood culture bottles (Becton, Dickinson and Comp

141 assay was validated with DNA extracted from BACTEC blood culture bottles positive for yeasts (n = 62

142 samples taken directly from signal-positive Bactec blood culture bottles within 24 h of positive sig

143 f 131), respectively, with 200 GPCC-positive BACTEC blood culture bottles, and 100% (74 of 74) and 99

144 r identifying six Candida spp. directly from BACTEC blood culture bottles.

145 tex agglutination (PBP-LA) assay directly on Bactec blood culture broth samples containing Staphyloco

146 tively, for identification of S. aureus from Bactec blood culture broth.

147 pared the MYCO/F Lytic bottle with two other BACTEC bottles and the Isolator system for the recovery

148 A total of 210 Bactec bottles demonstrating Gram-negative bacilli were

149 A total of 765 Bactec bottles demonstrating Gram-positive cocci in sing

150 rter TTD compared with antibiotic-containing Bactec bottles for E. coli (P = 0.026) and K. pneumoniae

151 BacT/Alert and Bactec bottles inoculated with antibiotics and P. aerugi

152 presumptive identification of isolates from BACTEC bottles.

153 pole Laboratories, Cranbury, N.J.) and three BACTEC bottles: the MYCO/F Lytic bottle, the BACTEC Plus

154 remia was detected on 2.1% of occasions with BACTEC compared to 31% of occasions with LyF (P < 0.05)

155 identification of Staphylococcus aureus from BACTEC culture broth showed a sensitivity, a specificity

156 While not as sensitive as BACTEC culture, PCR detected 17 of 18 specimens which gr

157 90% (135 of 150) of Candida pathogens, while Bactec detected 66% (100 of 150).

158 for VersaTREK was 2.2 h faster than that of Bactec FX (P < 0.001).

159 The Bactec FX and BacT/Alert systems performed equivalently

160 Recovery of Candida spp. using the BD Bactec FX blood culture (BC) system (Bactec Plus Aerobic

161 In bottles containing antifungal agents, Bactec FX recovered 83.1% of isolates, whereas VersaTREK

162 In the absence of antifungal agents, Bactec FX recovered 97.4% of Candida spp., and VersaTREK

163 In the presence of antifungal agents, the Bactec FX recovery time was significantly faster than th

164 = 0.0860); both systems were better than the Bactec FX system (71.2%; P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0003, resp

165 SP<71> method significantly outperformed the Bactec FX system (84.7% versus 64.4%; P = 0.0006) but no

166 center trial, 155 blood cultures from the BD Bactec FX system and 212 from the bioMerieux BacT/Alert

167 vels of commonly used antifungal agents, the Bactec FX system demonstrated a significantly greater re

168 This study shows that the Bactec FX system is suboptimal for product sterility tes

169 In 2015, failure of the Bactec FX system to detect mold contamination in two pro

170 Overall, BD Bactec Plus media (Bactec FX system) outperformed TREK 80 ml Redox media (V

171 uate three test systems (compendial USP<71>, Bactec FX, and BacT/Alert Dual-T) over seven different c

172 BACTEC had a 4.5-hour faster detection time (P < .0001),

173 ere used, the BacT performed better than the Bactec in overall growth detection, time to growth detec

174 Blood was cultured using the automated Bactec incubator system.

175 In summary, BACTEC is quicker than LyF, but less sensitive.

176 aliquot taken from BD BACTEC Plus and/or BD BACTEC Lytic/10 bottles (Becton Dickinson [BD], Sparks,

177 BACTEC media has faster time to detection and increased

178 absolute increased rate of recovery for the Bactec media.

179 The whole blood BACTEC method (Becton Dickinson) may be useful for the e

180 . tuberculosis, all were positive by the MTD/BACTEC method (sensitivity, 100%).

181 gave a growth index (GI) of at least 10 (MTD/BACTEC method).

182 ver, none of the test methods, including the BACTEC method, accurately predicted the ampicillin resis

183 The BD BACTEC MGIT (Becton Dickinson, Berks, UK) liquid culture

184 ting of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by the BD Bactec MGIT 320 using the BD Bactec MGIT 960 (BD Diagnos

185 Trek Diagnostics, Inc., Westlake, Ohio) and BACTEC MGIT 960 (BD Biosciences, Sparks, Md.)-were compa

186 losis by the BD Bactec MGIT 320 using the BD Bactec MGIT 960 (BD Diagnostics, Sparks, MD) as a refere

187 4 days for ESP II and 12.5 and 11.9 days for BACTEC MGIT 960 (P < 0.05).

188 The recovery with BACTEC MGIT 960 alone was 102 (77%).

189 c Hain line probe assay (LPA) and phenotypic Bactec MGIT 960 analysis using 26 geographically diverse

190 Processed specimens were inoculated into the BACTEC MGIT 960 and BACTEC 460 TB systems, as well as on

191 ory routine procedure and were inoculated in Bactec MGIT 960 as well as Lowenstein-Jensen (LJ) medium

192 lse-positive signals occurred with 23 (0.7%) BACTEC MGIT 960 cultures and 84 (2.7%) ESP II cultures (

193 IT) that was monitored for 42 days using the Bactec MGIT 960 instrument.

194 BACTEC 460 radiometric system, and the newer BACTEC MGIT 960 method.

195 ions were determined for AP, BACTEC 460, and BACTEC MGIT 960 methods.

196 and were then evaluated by smear microscopy, BACTEC MGIT 960 Mycobacterial Detection System (MGIT) an

197 plus Middlebrook agar and 81.5 and 98.5% for BACTEC MGIT 960 plus Middlebrook agar.

198 lid media was 128 (97%), that recovered with BACTEC MGIT 960 plus solid media was 121 (92%), that rec

199 boratory, instrument-negative tubes from the Bactec MGIT 960 system are inspected visually for clumps

200 The Bactec MGIT 960 system for testing susceptibility to sec

201 mpared with the indirect method by using the Bactec MGIT 960 system in the context of patient screeni

202 e findings indicate that direct DST with the Bactec MGIT 960 system offers further time savings and i

203 cultured on Lowenstein Jensen media and the BACTEC MGIT 960 system, and identified using the Hain(R)

204 We evaluated the BACTEC MGIT 960 system, which is a fully automated, noni

205 In summary, the ESP II and BACTEC MGIT 960 systems performed comparably with regard

206 ecovery of all mycobacteria by ESP II and by BACTEC MGIT 960 were not significant; for the individual

207 oncentrations of 2 microg/ml (BACTEC 460 and BACTEC MGIT 960) and 1 microg/ml (AP) inhibited the grow

208 n the two newer test systems (BACTEC 460 and BACTEC MGIT 960), media containing subinhibitory levels

209 TD for MAC in each system were 10.0 days for BACTEC MGIT 960, 10.4 days for BACTEC 460 TB, and 25.9 d

210 re 172 (100%) for all systems, 147 (85%) for BACTEC MGIT 960, 123 (72%) for BACTEC 460 TB, and 106 (6

211 Overall contamination rates were 17.1% for BACTEC MGIT 960, 18.9% for ESP II, and 11.0% for Middleb

212 lates) for each of the systems were 8.1% for BACTEC MGIT 960, 4.9% for BACTEC 460 TB, and 21.1% for a

213 The recovery rates for ESP II, BACTEC MGIT 960, and Middlebrook agar, respectively, wer

214 ntigen secreted by MTBC which is cultured in BACTEC MGIT 960, followed by the analysis of matrix-assi

215 of the 362 isolates) was recovered with the BACTEC MGIT 960, followed by the BACTEC 460 TB (271, or

216 Additionally, 727 Bactec MGIT 960-positive cultures were tested, resulting

217 false-positive signals was greater than with BACTEC MGIT 960.

218 ates grown on agar and 107 cultures grown in Bactec MGIT broth.

219 Specimens were cultured using Bactec MGIT liquid medium and Middlebrook 7H11/S7H11 sol

220 Laboratory sites used Bactec MGIT or BacT/Alert and tracked results of time to

221 linezolid, and cycloserine and compared with Bactec MGIT results for pyrazinamide.

222 r M. tuberculosis complex were 14.4 days for BACTEC MGIT, 15.2 days for BACTEC 460 TB, and 24.1 days

223 edium), 77 (42%) of 183 with liquid culture (Bactec MGIT960 system), and 174 (84%) of 207 with Xpert

224 stance to first line anti-TB drugs using the BACTEC-MGIT960(TM) system.

225 BACTEC 13A (Becton Dickinson, Sparks, Md.), BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC (Becton Dickinson), BacT/ALERT MB (b

226 lood from a single venesection into a single BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC (MFL) vial.

227 d blood from patients in Malawi by using the BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC (MFL), ISOLATOR 10 (Isolator), Septi

228 The continuously monitored systems (BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC and BacT/ALERT MB) were as sensitive

229 was shortest for BacT/ALERT MB, followed by BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC and BACTEC 13A and then ISOLATOR 10.

230 The BACTEC MYCO/F Lytic blood culture bottle (Becton Dickins

231 the BacT/Alert MB system, that of the manual Bactec Myco/F Lytic procedure, and that of the Isolator

232 OLATOR 10 for 26 of 261 pairs, 12.8 days for BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC versus 11.0 days for BacT/ALERT MB f

233 /ALERT MB for 33 of 340 pairs, 13.2 days for BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC versus 20.4 days for ISOLATOR 10 for

234 23.8 days for Isolator 10, and 21.1 days for Bactec Myco/F Lytic versus 22.7 days for Isolator 10.

235 vered, BACTEC 13A was positive for 19 (73%), BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC was positive for 21 (81%), BacT/ALER

236 State, including isolates and early positive Bactec mycobacterial growth indicator tube (MGIT) 960 cu

237 The specificities and sensitivities of the Bactec mycobacterial growth indicator tube (MGIT) system

238 Growth was detected in all BacT and Bactec mycology bottles, all BacT aerobic bottles, and b

239 athogenic microorganisms were recovered from BACTEC NR6 (aerobic) bottles than from VITAL aerobic bot

240 vered from VITAL anaerobic bottles than from BACTEC NR7 (anaerobic) bottles.

241 on on Day 14 of therapy, days-to-positive in BACTEC on Day 30, and the baseline radiographic extent o

242 Lysis filtration (LyF) was compared with BACTEC PAEDS PLUS in estimating the prevalence of, and s

243 nary or exponential phase were inoculated in BACTEC Pediatric Plus F bottles and incubated.

244 n (TTD) of BacT/Alert Pediatric FAN (PF) and Bactec Peds Plus blood culture bottles.

245 med on positive BacT/Alert Pediatric FAN and Bactec Peds Plus blood cultures with Gram-negative organ

246 y, TTD, and antibiotic neutralization in the Bactec Peds Plus system compared to those in the Pediatr

247 for the rapid identification of pathogens in Bactec Peds Plus/F and Bactec standard anaerobic/F bottl

248 s undertaken to determine the utility of the BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle and the BACTEC 9240 instrument

249 Culture using BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle detected statistically signifi

250 lts indicate the superior performance of the BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle over the conventional agar pla

251 Recovery of bacteria was compared to routine BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F (AF) blood cultures.

252 were produced using 50 Candida isolates and BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F and Anaerobic/F blood culture bott

253 Bactec Plus Aerobic/F and BacT/Alert FA Plus BC bottles

254 However, the BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F bottle did not recover M. tubercul

255 s, the BACTEC system signaled that a bottle (BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F bottle or BACTEC Anaerobic Lytic/1

256 ential pathogen recovery was greater for the BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F bottle than for either the Isolato

257 BACTEC bottles: the MYCO/F Lytic bottle, the BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F bottle, and the BACTEC Anaerobic L

258 imal anaerobic companion bottle to pair with BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F medium for recovery of pathogenic

259 the BD Bactec FX blood culture (BC) system (Bactec Plus Aerobic/F medium) and the VersaTREK system (

260 cology media for each system were evaluated: Bactec Plus Aerobic/F, Plus Anaerobic/F, and Myco/F Lyti

261 n resin-containing BacT/Alert FN Plus and BD Bactec Plus anaerobic/F bottles as well as resin-free Ba

262 a level I trauma center was placed in paired BACTEC Plus and BacT/Alert FAN culture media and studied

263 For direct testing, an aliquot taken from BD BACTEC Plus and/or BD BACTEC Lytic/10 bottles (Becton Di

264 the ability of Becton Dickinson (Sparks, MD) BACTEC PLUS bottles and bioMerieux (Durham, NC) BacT/Ale

265 in BacT/Alert FN Plus bottles compared with Bactec Plus bottles.

266 Overall, BD Bactec Plus media (Bactec FX system) outperformed TREK 8

267 ere 15 (+/-1) days (range, 4 to 27 days) for BACTEC plus MTD and 19 (+/-1) days (range, 6 to 36 days)

268 ntrol bottles (no antibiotic added), and the BACTEC PLUS system recovered 95.1% of strains from test

269 Under these simulated conditions, the BACTEC PLUS system was superior to the BacT/Alert FA sys

270 The BACTEC radiometric broth dilution test method recommende

271 om previously published studies in which the BACTEC radiometric culture system had not been used.

272 ively diagnose pulmonary tuberculosis if the BACTEC radiometric culture system were in use.

273 trains (n = 34), were performed by using the Bactec radiometric growth system as the reference method

274 for repeat susceptibility testing using the BACTEC radiometric method and to the Centers for Disease

275 od were assessed, it was determined that the BACTEC resin bottle detected statistically significantly

276 tion for all pathogens combined favoring the BACTEC resin bottle over the Isolator tube (P < 0.05).

277 The BACTEC selective fungal medium (FM) (BD Biosciences, Spa

278 s as well as resin-free BacT/Alert SN and BD Bactec standard anaerobic bottles.

279 ation of pathogens in Bactec Peds Plus/F and Bactec standard anaerobic/F bottles that contained blood

280 than conventional test methods, such as the BACTEC system and the proportion method.

281 In our laboratory, the Bactec system compared to the BacT/Alert system was the

282 red cells and whole blood were compared, the Bactec system detected bacterial growth consistently soo

283 The BACTEC system required less processing time than the Iso

284 That is, the BACTEC system signaled that a bottle (BACTEC Plus Aerobi

285 n LTD for the same blood fractions using the Bactec system were 16.05 h and 15.64 h.

286 /ALERT system with FA and FN bottles and the BACTEC system with Plus (PL) and Lytic 10 (LY) bottles.

287 mpared to approximately 10(8) CFU/ml for the Bactec system).

288 For the BACTEC system, remaining levels were 0 to 30% of vancomy

289 eption of S. aureus) were recovered from the BACTEC system.

290 al), significantly more were detected by the BACTEC system.

291 oring blood culture systems (CMBCS) like the Bactec system.

292 detected, on average, 1.7 h sooner with the BACTEC system.

293 instances, growth was detected first in the BACTEC system; in 12 cases, growth registered first in t

294 compared to those of mycobacterial culture (BACTEC TB 460 and Middlebrook 7H11 biplates), smear for

295 conventional mycobacterial culture, with the BACTEC TB 460 and Middlebrook 7H11 biplates.

296 Clinical isolates also were tested with the BACTEC TB 460 system; these results agreed with those ob

297 were used to assess the abilities of LyF and BACTEC to isolate known oral streptococci.

298 ion in the BacT system was 25.62 h while the Bactec was 27.30 h (P < 0.01).

299 lection, the odds of that culture growing in BACTEC were 4.8- and 5.2-fold greater, respectively, tha

300 When LyF and BACTEC were compared, the time to detection of bacteremi