Literature DB >> 6339550

Comparison of the B-D urine culture kit with a standard culture method and with the MS-2.

W A Hubbard, P J Shalis, K D McClatchey.   

Abstract

A total of 100 random clinical urine specimens were divided and used to compare Becton, Dickinson & Co. B-D Urine Culture Kit-treated urine (BDU) with refrigerated urine (RU). Each RU-BDU pair was cultured with the standard calibrated loop-plate method and also screened with the Abbott Laboratories MS-2 system at 0, 5, and 24 h. An additional 158 positive urine specimens containing greater than 10(5) CFU/ml were tested by standard culturing and MS-2 at 0 and 24 h. In addition, growth curves were run for Escherichia coli containing RU-BDU pairs at 0 and 24 h, and MS-2 detection time frequencies were analyzed. Culture results showed few changes in colony counts at 0 and 5 h for RU and BDU specimens. At 24 h, there were decreased colony counts for 7.0% of RU and 17.7% of BDU specimens. MS-2 results showed detection rates at 0 h of 100% for RU and 82.9% for BDU specimens and at 24 h of 91.1% for RU and 63.3% for BDU specimens. The organisms most frequently missed at 24 h were E. coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Growth curve analysis showed a 1-h delay of logarithmic growth in BDU specimens. MS-2 detection time analysis showed delayed positive reports owing to be extended detection time for BDU specimens. The B-D Urine Culture Kit is a convenient transport system; however, some difficulty in recovering organisms at 24 h with the standard culture method and increased difficulty with the MS-2 system were recognized.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6339550      PMCID: PMC272630          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.17.2.327-331.1983

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


  11 in total

1.  Bacterial multiplication in urine during refrigeration.

Authors:  W L RYAN; R D MILLS
Journal:  Am J Med Technol       Date:  1963 May-Jun

2.  Effect of delay on culture of urine.

Authors:  R Hindman; B Tronic; R Bartlett
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1976-07       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Multiplication of contaminant bacteria in urine and interpretation of delayed culture.

Authors:  D B Wheldon; M Slack
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1977-07       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Screening of urine cultures by three automated systems.

Authors:  M T Pezzlo; G L Tan; E M Peterson; L M de la Maza
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Evaluation of preservative fluid for urine collected for culture.

Authors:  B A Lauer; L B Reller; S Mirrett
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1979-07       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  A preservative for urine specimens in transit to the bacteriological laboratory.

Authors:  C R Amies; A Corpas
Journal:  J Med Microbiol       Date:  1971-08       Impact factor: 2.472

7.  Urine culture transport tubes: effect of sample volume on bacterial toxicity of the preservative.

Authors:  K K Nickander; C J Shanholtzer; L R Peterson
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Laboratory assessment of physical and chemical methods of preserving urine specimens.

Authors:  P G Watson; B I Duerden
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 3.411

9.  Boric acid preservation of urine samples.

Authors:  I A Porter; J Brodie
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1969-05-10

10.  Evaluation of the B-D urine culture kit.

Authors:  K L Guenther; J A Washington
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 5.948

View more
  5 in total

1.  Microbial stabilization of antibiotic-containing urine samples by using the FLORA-STAT urine transport system.

Authors:  G L Dorn
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Rapid isolation and presumptive diagnosis of uropathogens by using membrane filtration and differential media.

Authors:  M P Friedman; J M Danielski; T E Day; J C Dunne; A T Evangelista; T R Freeman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1991-11       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Evaluation of liquid and lyophilized preservatives for urine culture.

Authors:  M P Weinstein
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1983-10       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Effect of the B-D Urine Culture Kit on an automated bacteriuria screen.

Authors:  M T Pezzlo; S Conway; M Jacobson; E M Peterson; L M de la Maza
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Effectiveness of Preanalytic Practices on Contamination and Diagnostic Accuracy of Urine Cultures: a Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mark T LaRocco; Jacob Franek; Elizabeth K Leibach; Alice S Weissfeld; Colleen S Kraft; Robert L Sautter; Vickie Baselski; Debra Rodahl; Edward J Peterson; Nancy E Cornish
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 26.132

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.