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 The BACTEC 460 system currently provides the most rapid dete

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

59 147 (85%) for BACTEC MGIT 960, 123 (72%) for BACTEC 460 TB, and 106 (62%) for all solid media combine

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

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

62 10.0 days for BACTEC MGIT 960, 10.4 days for BACTEC 460 TB, and 25.9 days for solid media.

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

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

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

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

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

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

69 kansasii isolates were recovered only by the BACTEC 460.

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

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

72 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

86 The BACTEC 460TB PZA susceptibility test for Mycobacterium t

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

96 < 0.01) with BACTEC 9240 (35.0 h) than with BACTEC 9050 (61.4 h).

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

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

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

100 niae which was isolated more frequently with BACTEC 9050.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

109 The Plus Aerobic/F resin bottle of the BACTEC 9240 automated blood culture system (Becton Dicki

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

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

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

113 The BACTEC 9240 blood culture system with a standard aerobic

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

121 The BACTEC 9240 system detected growth of most Candida isola

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

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

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

125 of organisms with BACTEC 9050 compared with BACTEC 9240.

126 and susceptibility testing was performed in Bactec 960 MGIT.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

149 presumptive identification of isolates from BACTEC bottles.

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

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

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

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

154 90% (135 of 150) of Candida pathogens, while Bactec detected 66% (100 of 150).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

165 Blood was cultured using the automated Bactec incubator system.

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

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

168 BACTEC media has faster time to detection and increased

169 absolute increased rate of recovery for the Bactec media.

170 s the richness of its medium compared to the BACTEC medium.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

178 4 days for ESP II and 12.5 and 11.9 days for BACTEC MGIT 960 (P < 0.05).

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

190 The Bactec MGIT 960 system for testing susceptibility to sec

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

199 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

224 23.8 days for Isolator 10, and 21.1 days for Bactec Myco/F Lytic versus 22.7 days for Isolator 10.

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

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

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

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

229 bic medium versus that of the nonradiometric BACTEC NR-660 PEDS PLUS medium for the detection of seps

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

259 in four medical centers were inoculated into BACTEC Plus/F and BacT/Alert FAN aerobic culture bottles

260 The BACTEC radiometric broth dilution test method recommende

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

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

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

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

265 nclude that among the methods evaluated, the BACTEC radiometric method appeared to be the best for de

266 T contamination rate was reduced to 12%; the BACTEC rate was not significantly affected (5.5%).

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

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

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

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

271 range, 4 to 12 days) for both drugs with the BACTEC system (P < 0.001).

272 all statistically significantly less for the BACTEC system (P < 0.05).

273 n were seen with streptococci (10.7 h by the BACTEC system and 17.9 h by the BacT/Alert system) and y

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

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

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

277 The BACTEC system required less processing time than the Iso

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

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

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

281 y the BacT/Alert system versus 37.2 h by the BACTEC system).

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

283 (MGIT) system has a liquid medium, like the BACTEC system, and does not require needles when inocula

284 ation to the species level was less with the BACTEC system, but this result was statistically signifi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

294 II plus Middlebrook agar and 85 and 96% for BACTEC TB plus Middlebrook agar.

295 results to those obtained by the radiometric BACTEC TB system and the method of proportion.

296 ys for ESP II; 14.4, 16.6, and 12.1 days for BACTEC TB; and 17.8, 18.3, and 18.8 days for Middlebrook

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