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: Comparative evaluation of vacuum-based surface sampling methods for collection of Bacillus spores.
    Author: Calfee MW, Rose LJ, Morse S, Mattorano D, Clayton M, Touati A, Griffin-Gatchalian N, Slone C, McSweeney N.
    Journal: J Microbiol Methods; 2013 Dec; 95(3):389-96. PubMed ID: 24184017.
    Abstract:
    In this study, four commonly-used sampling devices (vacuum socks, 37 mm 0.8 μm mixed cellulose ester (MCE) filter cassettes, 37 mm 0.3 μm polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) filter cassettes, and 3M™ forensic filters) were comparatively evaluated for their ability to recover surface-associated spores. Aerosolized spores (~10(5)CFUcm(-2)) of a Bacillus anthracis surrogate were allowed to settle onto three material types (concrete, carpet, and upholstery). Ten replicate samples were collected using each vacuum method, from each material type. Stainless steel surfaces, inoculated simultaneously with test materials, were sampled with pre-moistened wipes. Wipe recoveries were utilized to normalize vacuum-based recoveries across trials. Recovery (CFUcm(-2)) and relative recovery (vacuum recovery/wipe recovery) were determined for each method and material type. Recoveries and relative recoveries ranged from 3.8 × 10(3) to 7.4 × 10(4)CFUcm(-2) and 0.035 to 1.242, respectively. ANOVA results indicated that the 37 mm MCE method exhibited higher relative recoveries than the other methods when used for sampling concrete or upholstery. While the vacuum sock resulted in the highest relative recoveries on carpet, no statistically significant difference was detected. The results of this study may be used to guide selection of sampling approaches following biological contamination incidents.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]