Comparison of RapID-ANA and minitek with a conventional method for biochemical identification of anaerobes

Two micromethods for the identification of anaerobes, one requiring growth (Minitek) and one nongrowth dependent (RapID-ANA), were compared with a conventional identification culture system. For 222 clinical isolates, RapID-ANA agreed with PRAS in 187 (84%) and Minitek agreed for only 170 strains (76%). Both systems identified common isolates well, but encountered some difficulty in identifying less common clostridia and Gram-negative bacilli. Although adequate for most strains, the results from both systems should be interpreted with caution, particularly for less frequently isolated species.