1887

Chapter 4.14 : Suggestions for a Practical Scheme for the Workup of Anaerobic Cultures

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Ebook: Choose a downloadable PDF or ePub file. Chapter is a downloadable PDF file. File must be downloaded within 48 hours of purchase

Buy this Chapter
Digital (?) $30.00

Preview this chapter:
Zoom in
Zoomout

Suggestions for a Practical Scheme for the Workup of Anaerobic Cultures, Page 1 of 2

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555818814/9781555818814_Chap4.14-1.gif /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555818814/9781555818814_Chap4.14-2.gif

Abstract:

When a specimen is sent to the laboratory in an appropriate container and from an appropriate site with a request for anaerobe testing, a Gram stain should be performed and reported. The results of the Gram stain should direct the culture workup to be done as well as provide information to the clinician and the laboratory about the quality of the specimen and the potential for mixed aerobic and anaerobic floras. All anaerobe requests should receive a simultaneous aerobic culture, and these should be worked up in concert before the report is finalized. The scheme for identification of anaerobes can take on many models, depending upon the extent of workup required by the clinicians and the amount of expertise and time that can be allotted to their identification by the clinical microbiologist. Certainly, all single isolates from sterile sites should be completely worked up to genus and species name as much as is possible. It is less consistent among laboratories as to how much is fully identified in nonsterile sites or what should be identified when a “sterile” site, such as ascites fluid or abscess or even tissues, contains a mixed flora, including aerobic and anaerobic organisms, in a quantity of more than three organisms.

Citation: Hall G. 2016. Suggestions for a Practical Scheme for the Workup of Anaerobic Cultures, p 4.14.1-4.14.4. In Leber A (ed), Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Fourth Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818814.ch4.14
Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

Figures

Image of Figure 4.14–1
Figure 4.14–1

Workup of isolates from sterile sites. EYA, egg yolk agar.

Citation: Hall G. 2016. Suggestions for a Practical Scheme for the Workup of Anaerobic Cultures, p 4.14.1-4.14.4. In Leber A (ed), Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Fourth Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818814.ch4.14
Permissions and Reprints Request Permissions
Download as Powerpoint

References

/content/book/10.1128/9781555818814.chap4.14
1. Hall GS. 1991. Practical approach to identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing of anaerobes. Tech Sample Mb-3. American Society for Clinical Pathology, Chicago, IL.
2. Baron EJ, Citron DM. 1997. Anaerobic identification flowchart using minimal laboratory resources. Clin Infect Dis 25:S143S146.
3. Meredith FT, Phillips HK, Reller LB. 1997. Clinical utility of broth cultures of cerebrospinal fluid from patients at risk for shunt infections. J Clin Microbiol 35:31093111.
4. Skinner PR, Taylor AJ, Coakham H. 1978. Propionibacteria as a cause of shunt and post-neurosurgical infections. J Clin Pathol 31:10851090.
5. Thompson TP, and Albright AL. 1998. Propionibacterium acnes infections of cerebrospinal fluid shunts. Childs Nerv Sys. 14: 378380.
6. Kessler L, Piemont Y, Ortega F, Lesens O, Boeri C, Averous C, Meyerm R, Hansmann Y, Christmann D, Gaudias J, Pinget M. 2006. Comparison of microbiological results of needle puncture vs. superficial swab in infected diabetic foot ulcer with osteomyelitis. Diabet Med 23:99102.
7. Senneville E, Melliez H, Beltrand E, Legou L, Valette M, Cazaubiel M, Cordonnier M, Caillaux M, Yazdanpanah Y, Mouton Y. 2005. Culture of percutaneous bone biopsy specimens for diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis: concordance with ulcer swab cultures. Clin Infect Dis 42:5762.
8. Mims C, Dockrell HM, Goering R, Roitt I, Wakelin D, Zuckerman M. 2004. Medical Microbiology, 3rd ed. Mosby, Philadelphia, PA.
9. Song Y, Liu C, McTeague M, Finegold SM. 2003. 16S ribosomal DNA sequence-based analysis of clinically significant Gram-positive anaerobic cocci. J Clin Microbiol 41:13631369.
10. Song Y. 2004. Anaerobiosis: molecular biology, genetics, and other aspects—minireview. PCR-based diagnostics for anaerobic infections. Anaerobe 11:7991.
11. Song Y, C. Liu C, McTeague M, Vu A, Liu JY, Finegold SM. 2003. Rapid identification of Gram-positive anaerobic coccal species originally classified in the genus Peptrostreptococcus by multiplex PCR assays using genus- and species-specific primers. Microbiology 149:17191727.
12. Jousimies-Somer H, Summanen P. 2002. Recent taxonomic changes and terminology update of clinically significant anaerobic Gram-negative bacteria (excluding spirochetes). Clin Infect Dis 35:S17S21.

Tables

Generic image for table
Table 4.14–1

Identification of isolates of anaerobic bacteria in nonsterile sites

Citation: Hall G. 2016. Suggestions for a Practical Scheme for the Workup of Anaerobic Cultures, p 4.14.1-4.14.4. In Leber A (ed), Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Fourth Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818814.ch4.14

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error