These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical evaluation of the RapID-ANA II panel for identification of anaerobic bacteria.
    Author: Celig DM, Schreckenberger PC.
    Journal: J Clin Microbiol; 1991 Mar; 29(3):457-62. PubMed ID: 2037661.
    Abstract:
    The accuracy of the RapID-ANA II system (Innovative Diagnostic Systems, Inc., Atlanta, Ga.) was evaluated by comparing the results obtained with that system with results obtained by the methods described by the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Three hundred anaerobic bacteria were tested, including 259 clinical isolates and 41 stock strains of anaerobic microorganisms representing 16 genera and 48 species. When identifications to the genus level only were included, 96% of the anaerobic gram-negative bacilli, 94% of the Clostridium species, 83% of the anaerobic, nonsporeforming, gram-positive bacilli, and 97% of the anaerobic cocci were correctly identified. When correct identifications to the genus and species levels were compared, 86% of 152 anaerobic gram-negative bacilli, 76% of 34 Clostridium species, 81% of 41 anaerobic, nonsporeforming, gram-positive bacilli, and 97% of 73 anaerobic cocci were correctly identified. Eight isolates (3%) produced inadequate identification in which the correct identification was listed with one or two other possible choices and extra tests were required for separation. A total of 9 isolates (3%) were misidentified by the RapID-ANA II panel. Overall, the system was able to correctly identify 94% of all the isolates to the genus level and 87% of the isolates to the species level in 4 h by using aerobic incubation.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]