Comparison of Signal and Bactec NR‐660 blood culture systems

Abstract

The Signal blood culture system was compared with the Bactec NR-660. A total of 1617 blood culture sets yielded 143 (8.8%) significant isolates; 113 (79.0%) were from positive bottles in both the Bactec and Signal systems. Twelve organisms (8.4%) were detected and isolated from the Signal system only and another 18 (12.6%) from the Bactec system only. Of these 18, five were Signal-positive but the organism was not recovered and four organisms were isolated from negative Signal bottles on terminal subculture. The time taken to detection for each system was similar; the Signal system detected 68% and the Bactec 63% of significant positives within 24 h. At 48 h Bactec detected 91% and the Signal 85%. A significantly-reduced number of bottles which gave a positive signal but were negative by microscopical and cultural methods was found, compared with previous reports. The 1 h incubation period prior to the insertion of the Signal growth indicator device was considered to be the cause of this reduction in the proportion of false positives. Fifty-five percent (42/77) of the Bactec false positives were due to delta growth value. This is when there is an increase in the growth index of > or = 15 without the positive threshold level of 30 being attained. This occurred in the anaerobic bottle on day 2 with 42 bottles. Another 40% (31/77) of the false positives had a growth value between the positive threshold of 30 and a value of 35. Eighty (4.9%) of Bactec and 65 (4.0%) of Signal sets yielded clinically non-significant isolates.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)