全自动血培养瓶的再利用实验评价

目的 评价全自动血培养瓶的再利用实验。方法 研制高营养快速细菌培养基,并将其应用于全自动血培养仪进行再利用实验,分析阳性率、阳性检出时间和检出菌的种类。结果 经32例全自动血培养再利用实验,平均阳性检出时间在再利用血培养瓶与仪器对照组之间无显著的差异(P<0.05)。608例再利用血培养分离到78株细菌,阳性率12.9％,24 h内检出的阳性占64.1％,48 h内检出的阳性占87.2％,72h内检出的阳性占96.2％。结论 临床应用全自动血培养瓶的再利用实验可提高血培养阳性率,缩短检测时间,减少污染机会,结果快速、准确。     

全自动血培养系统检测需氧血培养标本结果分析

目的评价BacT／Alert 120全自动血培养系统的临床应用情况。方法回顾性分析BacT／Alert 120全自动血培养系统检测1040例需氧血培养标本的阳性率、阳性检出时间、细菌种类以及假阳性、假阴性结果。结果1040例需氧血培养标本分离到98株细菌，阳性率9．42％，最快阳性检出时间2h，24h内检出的阳性占54．1％，48h内检出的阳性占79．6％，72h内检出的阳性占93．9％，假阳性率1．05％，未发现假阴性。结论应用BacT／Alert120全自动血培养系统提高了血培养的阳性率，缩短了培养时间，结果快速、准确。     

BacT/Alert 240全自动血培养仪的临床应用及评价

目的：评价全自动血培养仪BacT/Alert 240的临床应用情况，方法：回顾性分析BacT/Alert240全自动血培养系统检测7124份标本的阳性率，阳性检出时间，细菌种类以及假阳性率，假阴性率和污染率，结果：7124份血培养分离到804株微生物，其中细菌764株，阳性率11．5％，最快阳性检出时间2小时，24小时内检出的阳性占69．9％，48小时内占87．3％，72小时内占91．3％，804株细菌分布于24个属，假阳性率4．9％，假阴性率0．4％，污染率0．3％，结论：BacT/Alert 240全自动血培养仪提高了血培养的阳性率，缩短了阳性检出时间，检出细菌种类多尤其是苛养菌阳性率增加，减少污染机会，而且操作简便，结果快速，准确。     

ESP全自动血培养仪的临床应用及评价

目的评价ESP全自动血培养仪(简称ESP)临床应用情况。方法用ESP检测2147份血标本,观察其阳性检出率、检出时间,并对所检出细菌的种类及阳性率进行分析。结果2147份血标本中ESP提示阳性322例,分离出294株细菌,阳性率为13．7％,最快检出时间为2h,24h内检出的阳性数占60．5％,48h内检出的阳性数占83．3％,72h检出的阳性数占99％。假阳性率为0．87％。未发现假阴性。结论应用ESP有较高阳性检出率,缩短了培养时间,增加了检出细菌的种类,结果快速、准确。     

全自动血培养系统检测730份需氧血培养结果分析

目的：评价全自动培养系统ＢａｃＴ／Ａｌｅｒｔ１２０的临床应用情况。方法：回顾性分析ＢａｘＴ／Ａｌｅｒｔ１２０全自动血培养系统检测７３０例需氧血培养的阳性率阳性检出时间,细菌种类以及阳性、假阴性率。结果;７３０例需 培养分离到８４株细菌,阳性率１１．５％,最快阳性检出时间２小时,２４小时内检出的阳性占６６．７％,４８小时内检出的阳性占８６．９％,７２小时内检出的阳性占９７．６％。８４株细菌分布于２８     

手工和全自动仪器血培养结果的分析

目的对手工法双相血培养瓶和BacT/Alert-3D240全自动血培养仪的检出结果作回顾性分析。方法对2011~2013年使用手工双向血培养瓶的615份血标本与2014年使用全自动血培养仪的1 062份血标本进行细菌阳性检出率、检出时间及检出种类的比较。结果 615例双向血培养瓶阳性48例,阳性率为7.8%,污染率0.98%,48h内肠杆菌科细菌检出率87.5%,葡萄球菌属细菌检出率83.3%。1 062例全自动血培养仪阳性99例分离出细菌,其中有临床意义的病原菌86株,阳性率为8.2%;污染菌8株,污染率0.75%;假阳性5株,为0.47%;48h内肠杆菌科细菌检出率95.5%,葡萄球菌属细菌检出率87%,链球菌检出率42.9%。结论 BacT/Alert-3D全自动血培养仪的阳性率稍高,并且检出时间短,细菌检出种类增多,提高了血培养送检数。     

全自动血培养系统检测730份需氧血培养结果分析

目的:评价全自动血培养系统BacT/Alert 120的临床应用情况.方法:回顾性分析BacT/Alert 120全自动血培养系统检测730例需氧血培养的阳性率,阳性检出时间,细菌种类以及假阳性、假阴性率.结果:730例需氧血培养分离到84株细菌,阳性率11.5%,最快阳性检出时间2小时,24小时内检出的阳性占66.7%,48小时内检出的阳性占86.9%,72小时内检出的阳性占97.6%.84株细菌分布于28个种属,假阳性率2.2%,未发现假阴性.结论:应用BacT/Alert 120全自动血培养系统提高了血培养的阳性率,缩短了培养时间,检出细菌种类多,减少污染机会,结果快速、准确.     

ESP全自动血培养仪的临床应用及评价

目的　评价ESP全自动血培养仪(简称ESP)临床应用情况。方法　用ESP检测2147份血标本,观 察其阳性检出率、检出时间,并对所检出细菌的种类及阳性率进行分析。结果　2147份血标本中ESP提示阳性 322例,分离出294株细菌,阳性率为13.7%,最快检出时间为2h,24h内检出的阳性数占60.5%,48h内检出 的阳性数占83.3%,72h检出的阳性数占99%。假阳性率为0.87%。未发现假阴性。结论　应用ESP有较高 阳性检出率,缩短了培养时间,增加了检出细菌的种类,结果快速、准确。     

404例血培养阳性报警时间分析

目的：分析不同细菌在全自动血培养仪（BacT／Alert3D）中的血培养阳性报警时间（TTP,timeto—positivityofbloodculture）及其意义。方法：回顾性分析微生物实验室在2010年1月至2012年12月期间接收的7688瓶血培养标本,对404例阳性结果的阳性报警时间进行统计分析。结果：404例阳性分离株中,肠杆菌科细菌、肠球菌、非发酵菌、链球菌、葡萄球菌、假丝酵母菌和厌氧菌阳性报警时间中位数依次是：11．7h、13．3h、15．2h、16．8h、23．5h、29．6h和48h。90．6％的标本在48小时内即出现阳性报警。结论：大部分阳性分离茵可在全自动血培养仪（BacT／Alert3D）48小时内检出,阳性报警的快慢因菌种不同而存在差异。     

全自动血培养系统临床应用评价

目的评价全自动血培养系统ＢａｃＴ／Ａｌｅｒｔ系统的功能及影响因素。方法１８００份血标本应用ＢａｃＴ／Ａｌｅｒｔ系统的分析结果对其分离阳性率、假阳性率、阳性最早出现时间及所分离出有意义的病原微生物进行讨论和评价。结果１８００份血液标本用ＢａｃＴ／Ａｌｅｒｔ全自动血液培养仪检测，检出阳性标本３６３份（２０．２％）；平均假阳性率为１．６％；系统总体阳性出现时间分别为≤１０小时占２０．８％；１０～２４小时占４１．６％；２４～４８小时占３５．６％；超过４８小时报告阳性占２％。结论ＢａｃＴ／Ａｌｅｒｔ系统全自动血液分析仪具有自动化程度高、快速、正确等优点，严格控制各项操作条件是正确报告的关键     

国产全自动血培养系统及配套血培养瓶性能评估

目的 通过与美国BD BACTEC FX200全自动血培养系统的比较,对国产LABSTAR全自动血培养系统进行性能评估。方法 两种血培养系统分别使用标准菌株模拟样本和临床样本,分别对需养瓶和厌氧瓶进行评估。将标准菌株和疑似血流感染的临床样本按要求分别注入两种产品配套血培养瓶内进行培养,对比评估国产LABSTAR与对照产品结果的一致率,及阳性结果报警的时间差异。结果模拟样本评估结果:需氧瓶组评估23例模拟样本,两个血培养系统全部报阳,阳性报警时间无统计学差异。厌氧瓶组评估14例模拟样本,同时报阳的11例报警有统计学差异。临床样本评估结果:需氧瓶组531例,25例报阳结果相同,报警时间有统计学差异,培养结果总体一致率为96.4%; 厌氧瓶组361例,8例报阳结果相同,报警时间有统计学差异,培养结果总体一致率为95.8%。结论 国产LABSTAR全自动血培养系统与对照美国BD BACTEC FX200全自动血培养系统培养结果一致率高,但阳性结果报警时间偏长。     

血培养瓶增菌法快速鉴定和快速药物敏感性试验可行性分析

目的 探讨用血培养瓶增菌法培养脑脊液样本,将报阳样本直接离心富集细菌后,采用激光解吸电离飞行时间质谱(MALDI-TOF MS)进行快速鉴定和快速药物敏感性试验的可行性.方法 收集2018年12月—2019年7月华山医院脑脊液样本1446例,随机抽取345例采用血培养瓶增菌法培养,1101例采用常规浓缩集菌培养法培养,...     

Bactec FX和Bact/Alert 3D两种血培养系统对菌血症的检出性能分析

目的对比分析Bactec FX血培养系统Bactec Plus树脂需氧瓶(简称BO-P瓶)和Bact/Alert 3D全自动血培养系统SA标准瓶(简称Bio-SA瓶)/SN厌氧瓶(简称Bio-SN瓶)对菌血症的检出能力及特点,探讨提高血培养阳性率、快速准确地作出病原学诊断的方法。方法从双侧部位抽取患者的静脉血,一侧注入BO-P瓶,另一侧注入Bio-SA瓶和Bio-SN瓶,置于相应培养系统培养,比较这3种血培养瓶的阳性率及检出时间。结果 6 188份标本中确认阳性765份(12.36%);确认污染134份(2.17%);假阳性11份(0.18%)。332株临床分离菌中BO-P瓶检出293例,占88.25%;Bio-SA瓶检出271例,占81.63%,前者阳性率高于后者(χ2=5.687,P<0.05);Bio-SN瓶检出201例,占60.54%,其中厌氧菌3例,占0.90%。与Bio-SA瓶相比,BO-P瓶检出阳性的时间优于Bio-SA瓶(P<0.05),尤其是对非发酵菌。污染菌以革兰阳性菌为主(89.55%),主要是凝固酶阴性的葡萄球菌(67.91%),少部分革兰阴性杆菌(9.7%)。结论双侧抽血并联合使用Bactec FX和Bact/Alert 3D血培养系统可利用各自优势,更有效地提高血培养阳性率。     

Detection of micro-organisms using a two bottle blood culture system: a twelve month study.

Over a twelve month period the isolation rate of pathogens, frequency of isolation of non-significant organisms, and time taken to detect positive cultures from a two-bottle blood culture system were analysed. Of 6916 blood cultures collected, 978 organisms were isolated from 863 cultures, 540 organisms being considered clinically significant and the majority (81%) being isolated within 48 h. Our results showed that use of more than one bottle increased the general isolation rate, with both bottles facilitating growth independently. This situation was particularly apparent in the cases of Haemophilus influenzae and Neisseria meningitidis, which showed that using the system alone only 76% and 33% (respectively) of the total number of strains would have been isolated. The results of this study reinforce the need for a second bottle containing a suitable culture medium.     

Delayed insertion of blood culture bottles into automated continuously monitoring blood culture systems increases the time from blood sample collection to the detection of microorganisms in bacteremic patients

This study examined the effects on patients with bacteremia of delaying the insertion of a blood culture bottle into an automated, continuously monitoring blood culture system. We investigated the time taken from the collection of blood samples (collection) to the insertion of blood culture bottles inoculated with blood samples into the instrument (insertion), and compared the mean detection time from collection to a positive signal from the instrument with the time between collection and insertion. The study was conducted from January 2003 to December 2004 at Kyoto University Hospital. Insertion into the system on the day of blood sample collection was defined as same-day insertion, and insertion on a different day to collection was defined as delayed insertion. The 7394 aerobic and anaerobic blood culture bottle sets obtained during the study period included 4361 sets with same-day insertion and 3033 sets with delayed insertion. For same-day insertion, 458 microorganisms were isolated from 432 positive sets in which at least one blood culture bottle was positive. For delayed insertion, 405 microorganisms were isolated from 379 positive sets in which at least one blood culture bottle was positive. The mean detection time for all microorganisms was significantly earlier for same-day insertion than for delayed insertion (28.3 h vs. 45.0 h, respectively, P < 0.0001). Delays from collection to insertion affect the time from collection to the detection of microorganisms.     

伯泰血培养瓶对细菌培养生长能力和敏感性分析

目的用已知细菌检测伯泰血培养瓶细菌培养生长能力。方法将已知细菌稀释成不同浓度,定量加入伯泰血培养瓶,观察细菌生长情况。结果需氧瓶对需氧菌的阳性检测率为100％,检测敏感性为10CFU／ml;厌氧瓶对厌氧菌的阳性检测率为100％,对黑色消化球菌、厌氧消化链球菌和脆弱类杆菌的检测敏感性分别为10CFU／ml、100CFU／ml和1000CFU／ml;厌氧瓶对兼性厌氧菌的阳性检测率为100％,检测敏感性为10CFU／ml。结论伯泰血培养瓶对需氧菌、厌氧菌及兼性厌氧菌的检测能力可以满足临床要求。     

Improvement of positive blood culture detection by agitation

To evaluate the advantages of agitation in reducing the detection time and increasing the recovery rate of positive blood cultures, 1,000 three-bottle sets of tryptic soy broth on adult inpatients were analyzed. Two bottles were transiently vented, one of which was agitated (250 rpm) for 7-19 hr at 35 degrees C. The other vented bottle and the anaerobic bottle were incubated stationary at 35 degrees C. Smears and subcultures were performed 7-19 hr after collection on both agitated and nonagitated vented bottles. Subcultures were done on all bottles at 72 hr and smears were performed on the anaerobic bottle. There were 137 of 1000 (13.7%) positive cultures from 90 patients. The agitated bottle detected 112 of 137 (81.8%) positive cultures, was the first or only means of detection in 57 of 137 cultures (41.6%), and was the only positive bottle in 30 of 137 (21.9%) cultures. The nonagitated vented bottle detected 89 of 137 (65.0%) of positive cultures and was the only means of detection in 13 of 137 (9.5%), but was never the first means of detection. The anaerobic bottle detected 76 of 137 (55.5%) of positive cultures, was the first or only means of detection in 11 of 137 (8.0%), and was the first means of detection in one of 137 (0.7%) cultures. When both the agitated and nonagitated bottle were positive, the agitated bottle was positive on the average 35 hr earlier. We conclude that agitation of the vented bottle in a conventional blood culture system significantly decreases the detection time of positive blood cultures and increases the number of positive blood cultures detected.