ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2001
Evaluation of BACTEC MYCO/F Lytic medium for recovery of mycobacteria, fungi, and bacteria from blood.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Controlled comparison of BACTEC 13A, MYCO/F LYTIC, BacT/ALERT MB, and ISOLATOR 10 systems for detection of mycobacteremia.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2003Trial
- Comparison of performances of laboratory methods in diagnosing pulmonary cryptococcosis in 1508 patients having lung biopsy tissues collected: a 6-year retrospective study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- Comparison of Performances of GeneXpert MTB/RIF, Bactec MGIT 960, and Bactec Myco/F Systems in Detecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis in Biopsy Tissues: a Retrospective Study.Microbiology spectrum · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a Rapid Fungal Detection Panel for Identification of Candidemia at an Academic Medical Center.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Visible DNA Microarray System as an Adjunctive Molecular Test in Identification of Pathogenic Fungi Directly from a Blood Culture Bottle.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2018Article
- Insidious Risk of Severe Mycobacterium chimaera Infection in Cardiac Surgery Patients.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2017Article
- Evaluation of the efficacy of Myco/F lytic system, MGIT960 system and Lowenstein-Jensen medium for recovery of Mycobacterium tuberculosis from sterile body fluids.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Diagnosis of active tuberculosis disease: From microscopy to molecular techniques.Journal of clinical tuberculosis and other mycobacterial diseases · 2016Review
- A dedicated fungal culture medium is useful in the diagnosis of fungemia: a retrospective cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2016Article
- What is the clinical significance of positive blood cultures with Aspergillus sp in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients? A 23 year experience.Bone marrow transplantation · 2005Article
- Use of the BACTEC MYCO/F LYTIC medium for detection of Brucella melitensis bacteremia.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2004Article
- Comparison of the BACTEC MYCO/F Lytic bottle to the isolator tube, BACTEC Plus Aerobic F/bottle, and BACTEC Anaerobic Lytic/10 bottle and comparison of the BACTEC Plus Aerobic F/bottle to the Isolator tube for recovery of bacteria, mycobacteria, and fungi from blood.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MYCO/F Lytic medium (MFL), a liquid medium developed for use with the BACTEC 9240 blood culture system, was compared to the Isolator system (IS) for the recovery of fungi and to the BACTEC 13A medium for the recovery of mycobacteria. Recovery of bacteria was compared to routine BACTEC Plus Aerobic/F (AF) blood cultures. Microbial growth was detected in 203 (17%) of 1,166 blood cultures. Fifty-seven specimens were positive for fungi: 35 were positive with both IS and MFL; six were positive with IS only (three Candida albicans, one Histoplasma capsulatum, one Candida glabrata, and one Fusarium species isolate); three were positive with AF only (two C. albicans and one Candida parapsilosis isolate); and 13 were positive with MFL only (five C. glabrata, three C. albicans, two Candida krusei, two Candida tropicalis, and one C. parapsilosis isolate; P > 0.05 versus IS). Eighteen of 19 blood cultures positive for H. capsulatum grew in both IS and MFL, although the time to detection for MFL was greater. The mean time to detection for all fungi was 8.15 days for IS and 12.07 days for MFL. Seven hundred forty specimens were also cultured for mycobacteria with MFL and 13A. Forty-four grew mycobacteria; 38 were positive with both 13A and MFL; and 16 were positive with MFL only. Mycobacterium avium was recovered from 41 specimens; 36 were positive for both systems and 5 were positive for MFL alone. MFL was also compared to the AF bottle for the same 740 specimens. MFL and AF both detected 34 of the 40 clinically significant bacteria, while IS detected only 15 of 40. In summary, MFL is an excellent medium for the recovery of fungi, mycobacteria, and bacteria; however, the time to detection of H. capsulatum is increased.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.