Abstract
The utility of anaerobic blood culture bottles remains controversial, especially for specimens from children. Data are limited on the inclusion of an anaerobic bottle as part of a blood culture "set" when using contemporary blood culture instruments and media. Here, we evaluated the clinical utility of anaerobic blood culture bottles (FN Plus) and aerobic bottles (FA Plus) for the BacT/Alert Virtuo blood culture system (bioMérieux). A total of 158,710 bottles collected between November 2018 and October 2019 were evaluated. There were 6,652 positive anaerobic bottles, of which 384 (5.8%) contained 403 obligate anaerobes. In patients <19 years old, there were 389 positive anaerobic bottles, with 15 (1.8%) containing 16 obligate anaerobes. If not for anaerobic bottles, all but 8 obligate anaerobes would have gone undetected. Furthermore, anaerobic bottles were advantageous for some facultative anaerobes. Staphylococcus aureus from anaerobic bottles demonstrated statistically significant increased recovery (1,992 anaerobic versus 1,901 aerobic bottles, P = 0.009) and faster mean time to positivity (1,138 versus 1,174 min, P = 0.027). Only 25 microorganisms had statistically significant improved recovery and/or faster time to positivity from aerobic versus anaerobic bottles, suggesting anaerobic bottles offer comparable growth for most species. Finally, if only an aerobic bottle had been collected, 2,027 fewer positive cultures would have been detected and 7,452 fewer isolates would have been reported, including cultures with S. aureus (413 isolates, 10.6% less), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (9 isolates, 3.1% less) and Escherichia coli (193 isolates, 14.0% less). Taken together, these findings support the practice of routinely including an anaerobic bottle for blood culture collection.