Explorer at Bigfoot.com
Sun Nov 23 20:58:07 EST 1997
Right, the database was developed based on the protocol defined in the
package insert. There are biochemical indicators in the card that would
almost certainly be affected by concentration and PH of the saline.
Somebody needs to remember their Chem 1 classes ;-)
Doing or using anything other than what the package insert calls for puts
the test and patient at risk and is possibly a violation of FDA
In article <Pine.GSO.3.96.971119081507.2730C-100000 at viper>,
shubert at sph.emory.edu says...
> I'm not to sure but perhaps the increased salt content interferes with the
> biochems?? Anyway, why does it matter, you're saving on NaCl anyway ;o).
> On 18 Nov 1997, Yersinia wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> > Does anyone know *why* it is necessary to use a .45 or .5% saline
> > solution, rather than a .85% saline solution, when preparing bacterial
> > suspensions for identification on Vitek? I asked someone at work today,
> > who could only say , about the .85% saline, "it doesn't work right," and
> > our Keeper of the Vitek Cards (who also had no idea) told me she didn't
> > want me "wasting" cards on the experiment I proposed (i.e., preparing the
> > same known organism, such as S. aureus ATCC #6538 in solution with .45%
> > saline and in .85% saline, then filling a GPI card with each/comparing
> > the results and perhaps doing the same with E. coli #8739/GNI; P.
> > aeruginosa #9027/NFC; B. subtilis #6633/BAC).
> > Well, I'm just really curious about this, hope someone out there knows!
> > Thank you for your time.
> > Infectionately,
> > Yersinia.
> > "Hell no, let 'em grow!"
. . .
Under Title 47, US Code, sending unsolicited commercial advertisements
is actionable in a court of law for damages.
More information about the Microbio