Literature DB >> 31092594

Detailed Analysis of the Characteristics of Sample Volume in Blood Culture Bottles.

Claes Henning1, Nilsu Aygül2, Patrik Dinnétz3, Karin Wallgren4, Volkan Özenci5,4.   

Abstract

Blood volume is the most important variable for the detection of microorganisms in blood cultures (BCs). Most standards recommend 40 to 60 ml blood, collected in several BC bottles filled up to 10 ml. We measured blood volume in individual BC bottles and analyzed the associations of hospital, bottle type, day of the week, daily sampling time, and age and sex of the patient with sampling volume and BC result. The variation in blood volume per BC bottle was analyzed in a mixed linear model using hospital, bottle type, weekday, sampling time, age, and sex as fixed factors and patient identification (ID) and episode as random factors to control for repetitive sampling of individual patients. Only 18% of all bottles were filled with the recommended 8 to 10 ml, and 47% were filled with less than 8 ml. The mean (± standard error) volume was larger in positive bottles (9.09 ± 0.15) than in negative bottles (8.47 ± 0.07) (P < 0.001). Blood volume was larger in BacT/Alert-FA Plus bottles than in -FN Plus BC bottles (P < 0.001). There were significantly lower volumes collected during the night (P < 0.001). The volume of blood collected decreased significantly with increasing patient age (P < 0.001). Larger volumes were collected from male patients than from female patients: 8.78 (± 0.06) versus 8.36 (± 0.06) ml (mean ± standard error [SE]), respectively (P < 0.001). The odds of detecting a positive patient increases by 13% for each additional milliliter of blood drawn. Our results show that we need to work actively with the development of blood sampling routines to overcome age and sex effects and to optimize blood sampling volumes.
Copyright © 2019 American Society for Microbiology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  blood culture; blood stream infections; detection of microorganisms; sample volume

Year:  2019        PMID: 31092594      PMCID: PMC6663918          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00268-19

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  22 in total

1.  Optimized pathogen detection with 30- compared to 20-milliliter blood culture draws.

Authors:  Robin Patel; Emily A Vetter; W Scott Harmsen; Cathy D Schleck; Hind J Fadel; Franklin R Cockerill
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-10-05       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 2.  Blood cultures: key elements for best practices and future directions.

Authors:  Stefan Riedel; Karen C Carroll
Journal:  J Infect Chemother       Date:  2010-05-21       Impact factor: 2.211

3.  Trends in blood culture contamination: a College of American Pathologists Q-Tracks study of 356 institutions.

Authors:  Leonas G Bekeris; Joseph A Tworek; Molly K Walsh; Paul N Valenstein
Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 5.534

4.  Is the volume of blood cultured still a significant factor in the diagnosis of bloodstream infections?

Authors:  Emilio Bouza; Dolores Sousa; Marta Rodríguez-Créixems; Juan García Lechuz; Patricia Muñoz
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-06-13       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Inadequate blood volume collected for culture: a survey of health care professionals.

Authors:  Michael W Donnino; Nikhil Goyal; Theresa M Terlecki; Kathryn F Donnino; Joseph B Miller; Ronny M Otero; Michael D Howell
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 7.616

6.  Education of phlebotomy teams improves blood volume in blood culture bottles.

Authors:  Jakko van Ingen; Nataliya Hilt; Ron Bosboom
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-12-26       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Sepsis in European intensive care units: results of the SOAP study.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Vincent; Yasser Sakr; Charles L Sprung; V Marco Ranieri; Konrad Reinhart; Herwig Gerlach; Rui Moreno; Jean Carlet; Jean-Roger Le Gall; Didier Payen
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 7.598

8.  Evaluation of the Yeast Traffic Light PNA FISH probes for identification of Candida species from positive blood cultures.

Authors:  Leslie Hall; Kara M Le Febre; Sharon M Deml; Sherri L Wohlfiel; Nancy L Wengenack
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-01-11       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Effects of volume and site of blood draw on blood culture results.

Authors:  Wilson I Gonsalves; Nancy Cornish; Michael Moore; Aimin Chen; Meera Varman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-09-30       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Bacteremia: a consideration of some experimental and clinical aspects.

Authors:  I L BENNETT; P B BEESON
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  1954-02
View more
  10 in total

1.  Single-Site Sampling versus Multisite Sampling for Blood Cultures: a Retrospective Clinical Study.

Authors:  Anna Ekwall-Larson; David Yu; Patrik Dinnétz; Hampus Nordqvist; Volkan Özenci
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 11.677

2.  Single-Sampling Strategy vs. Multi-Sampling Strategy for Blood Cultures in Sepsis: A Prospective Non-inferiority Study.

Authors:  David Yu; Anna Larsson; Åsa Parke; Christian Unge; Claes Henning; Jonas Sundén-Cullberg; Anna Somell; Kristoffer Strålin; Volkan Özenci
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2020-07-23       Impact factor: 5.640

3.  Effects of Blood Culture Aerobic/Anaerobic Bottle Collection Patterns from Both Sides of the Body on Positive Blood Culture Rate and Time-to-Positivity.

Authors:  Hainan Wen; Weigang Wang; Shoujun Xie; Qian Sun; Yueyi Liang; Baojiang Wen; Yanchao Liu; Lihong Sun; Zongwei Zhang; Jing Cao; Xiaoxuan Liu; Xiaoran Niu; Zirou Ouyang; Ning Dong; Jianhong Zhao
Journal:  Infect Drug Resist       Date:  2022-06-10       Impact factor: 4.177

4.  Comparison of Microorganism Detection and Time to Positivity in Pediatric and Standard Media from Three Major Commercial Continuously Monitored Blood Culture Systems.

Authors:  Melanie L Yarbrough; Meghan A Wallace; Carey-Ann D Burnham
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2021-06-18       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 5.  Blood Culture Utilization in the Hospital Setting: a Call for Diagnostic Stewardship.

Authors:  Valeria Fabre; Karen C Carroll; Sara E Cosgrove
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 11.677

Review 6.  Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections: An Evolution of Technologies towards Accurate and Rapid Identification and Antibiotic Susceptibility Testing.

Authors:  Kristel C Tjandra; Nikhil Ram-Mohan; Ryuichiro Abe; Marjan M Hashemi; Jyong-Huei Lee; Siew Mei Chin; Manuel A Roshardt; Joseph C Liao; Pak Kin Wong; Samuel Yang
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-12

Review 7.  Digital microbiology.

Authors:  A Egli; J Schrenzel; G Greub
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2020-06-27       Impact factor: 8.067

8.  Detection of bacterial co-infections and prediction of fatal outcomes in COVID-19 patients presenting to the emergency department using a 29 mRNA host response classifier.

Authors:  Nikhil Ram-Mohan; Angela J Rogers; Catherine A Blish; Kari C Nadeau; Elizabeth J Zudock; David Kim; James V Quinn; Lixian Sun; Oliver Liesenfeld; Samuel Yang
Journal:  medRxiv       Date:  2022-03-17

9.  Revisiting factors associated with blood culture positivity: Critical factors after the introduction of automated continuous monitoring blood culture systems.

Authors:  Pei-Chin Lin; Chia-Ling Chang; Yi-Hua Chung; Chih-Chun Chang; Fang-Yeh Chu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-07-29       Impact factor: 1.817

10.  The diagnostic value of next-generation sequencing technology in sepsis.

Authors:  Xiao-Guang Cao; Shu-Sheng Zhou; Chun-Yan Wang; Kui Jin; Hua-Dong Meng
Journal:  Front Cell Infect Microbiol       Date:  2022-09-14       Impact factor: 6.073

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.