Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A total of 120 mycobacterial isolates were recovered from 1,068 clinical specimens. Of these, 82.5% were in MGIT 960, 83.3% were in MB/BacT, 80% were in BACTEC 460, and 70% were on Löwenstein-Jensen medium. Mean times to detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis (n = 96) were significantly shorter with MGIT 960 (12.6 days, P = 0.003) and BACTEC 460 (11.8 days, P < 0.001) than with MB/BacT (15.9 days). Although, MGIT 960 showed the lowest rate of recovery of M. kansasii genotype I (64.3%), the earliest growth was detected with this system (8.9 days). Low and similar rates of contamination were obtained with MGIT 960 (3.3%) and MB/BacT (3%). The AccuProbe test for identification showed excellent sensitivities with MGIT 960 (96. 8%) and MB/BacT (100%) cultures. In addition to being nonradiometric, both MGIT 960 and MB/BacT are accurate, rapid, and labor-saving detection systems which could replace the radiometric method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alcaide et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: