CAJ | 학술논문

目的：比较具有吸附抗生素能力的2种血培养瓶，即BACTEC PLUS树脂需氧瓶（简称BD-P瓶）与BacT/Alert FA活性炭需氧瓶（简称Bio-FA瓶）对血流感染的检测能力。方法每位患者从两个不同部位采集血标本分别注入BD-P瓶和Bio-FA瓶，放入相应培养仪进行培养，记录报阳时间。结合临床用药资料对这2种具有不同吸附剂的血培养瓶的阳性检出率及报阳时间进行比较。结果在6670瓶血培养中阳性报警共1017瓶，确认污染196瓶（2．94％），有临床意义的阳性821瓶（12．31％）。共检出病原菌493株，其中双瓶阳性334例（67．75％）；BD-P瓶单瓶阳性102例（20．69％），Bio-FA瓶单瓶阳性57例（11．56％）。 BD-P瓶对病原菌的检出率优于Bio-FA瓶（P＜0．01），对于肠杆菌科和葡萄球菌的检出率BD-P瓶明显高于Bio-FA瓶（P＜0．01）。 BD-P瓶细菌报阳时间早于Bio-FA瓶（P＜0．01），特别是对肠杆菌科和非发酵菌的阳性报警时间明显早于Bio-FA瓶。由正在使用药物治疗的患者中检出344例阳性，其BD-P瓶的阳性检出率和报阳时间均高于和快于Bio-FA瓶（P＜0．05）；按不同的治疗药物进行分组，对头孢哌酮/舒巴坦BD-P瓶的吸附能力更强（P＜0．05）。结论应用BD-P瓶检测血流感染较Bio-FA瓶检出率更高，检测速度更快。而联合使用Bio-FA瓶和BD-P瓶，比单用一种培养瓶更具优势。
목적：비교구유흡부항생소능력적2충혈배양병，즉BACTEC PLUS수지수양병（간칭BD-P병）여BacT/Alert FA활성탄수양병（간칭Bio-FA병）대혈류감염적검측능력。방법매위환자종량개불동부위채집혈표본분별주입BD-P병화Bio-FA병，방입상응배양의진행배양，기록보양시간。결합림상용약자료대저2충구유불동흡부제적혈배양병적양성검출솔급보양시간진행비교。결과재6670병혈배양중양성보경공1017병，학인오염196병（2．94％），유림상의의적양성821병（12．31％）。공검출병원균493주，기중쌍병양성334례（67．75％）；BD-P병단병양성102례（20．69％），Bio-FA병단병양성57례（11．56％）。 BD-P병대병원균적검출솔우우Bio-FA병（P＜0．01），대우장간균과화포도구균적검출솔BD-P병명현고우Bio-FA병（P＜0．01）。 BD-P병세균보양시간조우Bio-FA병（P＜0．01），특별시대장간균과화비발효균적양성보경시간명현조우Bio-FA병。유정재사용약물치료적환자중검출344례양성，기BD-P병적양성검출솔화보양시간균고우화쾌우Bio-FA병（P＜0．05）；안불동적치료약물진행분조，대두포고동/서파탄BD-P병적흡부능력경강（P＜0．05）。결론응용BD-P병검측혈류감염교Bio-FA병검출솔경고，검측속도경쾌。이연합사용Bio-FA병화BD-P병，비단용일충배양병경구우세。
Objective To compare the detectability to the bloodstream infection by 2 kinds bottles of BACTEC PLUS resin oxygen bottle (BD-P bottles) and BacT/Alert FA active carbon oxygen bottle (Bio-FA bottles).Methods All blood samples of pa-tients from two different parts were injected into BD-P bottles and Bio-FA bottles and cultured in the blood culture system ,record posi-tive time.The positive rate and positive time of 2 different adsorbent blood culture bottles were compared combining with clinical data . Results There are 1017 positive bottles between the 6670 bottles,196 bottles were confirmed pollution ,accounted for 2.94%;the clin-ical significance of the positive 821 bottles,accounted for 12.31%.493 pathogenic strains were detected ,of which two bottles was posi-tive in 334 patients (67.75%),single BD-P bottle was positive in 102 cases (20.69%);single Bio-FA bottle was positive in 57 cases (11.56%).The detection rate of Bio-FA bottle was higher than that of BD-bottle P (P<0.01),especially for the detection of Enter-obacteriaceae and Staphylococcus .BD-P bottle bacteria Bao Yang predates the Bio-FA bottle (P<0.01),especially the positive alarm time for Enterobacteriaceae and non fermentive bacteria significantly earlier in Bio-FA bottles.In 344 positive cases using drug treat-ment,the positive rate and time of BD-P were higher and faster than that of the Bio-FA bottle ( P<0.05);and the adsorption ability of BD-P bottles to cefoperazone/sulbactam was stronger than that of the Bio-FA bottle ( P <0.05 ) according to different therapeutic drugs.Conclusion The detectability of BD-P bottles to the bloodstream infection was higher and faster than that of Bio-FA bottles. Combination of Bio-FA bottle and BD-P bottle was more advantage than using a single bottle .