Literature DB >> 6630469

Evaluation of liquid and lyophilized preservatives for urine culture.

M P Weinstein.   

Abstract

Culture results of urine specimens transported conventionally (sterile cup) and in a commercial liquid or an investigational lyophilized preservative were compared in a hospital that experiences substantial delays in specimen transport to the laboratory (greater than 40% of specimens received after a delay of greater than or equal to 2 h). At the time of initial plating in the laboratory, 106 of 111 (95.5%) specimens that were positive (greater than or equal to 10(5) CFU of a single organism per ml in pure culture) after conventional transport were also positive in liquid preservative. After a 24-h holding period (cup refrigerated, preserved urine at room temperature), agreement was 91.4% (96 of 105). At the time of initial plating, agreement between results obtained by the conventional method and those obtained by using lyophilized preservative was 96.9% (63 of 65); after 24 h, agreement was 92.4% (61 of 67). Complete inhibition of growth of three Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates was observed in liquid preservative; however, urine processed in the lyophilized preservative did not show inhibition. The proportion of urine cultures showing no change in quantitative growth between the time of initial plating and repeat plating at 24 h was virtually identical for all three processing methods (83.6 +/- 0.9%). After the 24-h holding period, specimens processed in lyophilized preservative were less likely to show diminished quantitative growth than were specimens processed conventionally or in liquid preservative but were more likely to show an increase in growth of greater than or equal to 1 log. Nonetheless, the apparent lack of toxicity of lyophilized preservative may make it preferable to the currently available liquid preservative.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1983        PMID: 6630469      PMCID: PMC270929          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.18.4.912-916.1983

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


  7 in total

1.  Transportation delay and the microbiological quality of clinical specimens.

Authors:  H Jefferson; H P Dalton; M R Escobar; M J Allison
Journal:  Am J Clin Pathol       Date:  1975-11       Impact factor: 2.493

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.  Accuracy of calibrated-loop transfer.

Authors:  A C Albers; R D Fletcher
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1983-07       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  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

5.  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

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

Authors:  W A Hubbard; P J Shalis; K D McClatchey
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  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

  7 in total
  2 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.  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

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.