Culture with BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle compared with conventional methods for detection of bacteria in synovial fluid

J. G. Hughes, E. A. Vetter, R. Patel, C. D. Schleck, S. Harmsen, L. T. Turgeant, F. R. Cockerill

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

131 Scopus citations

Abstract

An evaluation was undertaken to determine the utility of the BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle and the BACTEC 9240 instrument (Becton Dickinson Diagnostic Instrument Systems, Sparks, Md.) for the detection of clinically significant microorganisms in synovial fluid specimens. The Peds Plus/F bottle was used because in our laboratory the quantity of synovial fluid available for culture is frequently in the range of 0.5 to 3.0 ml. The culture results obtained with the Peds Plus/F bottle were compared to those obtained by a conventional agar plate method for a total of 805 synovial fluid specimens. Microbial growth was produced by 74 cultures (9.2%) from 60 patients, yielding a total of 77 microorganisms. Organisms were classified as pathogens (n = 62), contaminants (n = 12), or indeterminate (n = 3) on the basis of a review of the patients' medical histories. Culture using BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle detected statistically significantly more pathogens overall (62 versus 51 pathogens [P = 0.001]) and statistically fewer contaminants overall (1 versus 11 contaminants [P = 0.006]) than culture by the agar plate method. These results indicate the superior performance of the BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle over the conventional agar plate method for the detection of clinically significant microorganisms from synovial fluid specimens.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)4468-4471
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of clinical microbiology
Volume39
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Microbiology (medical)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Culture with BACTEC Peds Plus/F bottle compared with conventional methods for detection of bacteria in synovial fluid'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this