Misplaced confidence in the broad-spectrum antibiotic increased resistance among previously predictable anaerobic antibiograms, and the push to maximize productivity of available space and downsizing trends has created a need for a simplified, cost-effective, and superior method for the isolation and identification of anaerobic bacteria. In this study, the Oxyrase anaerobic plate system which requires no apparatus to create an anaerobic environment was compared to an anaerobic chamber in the isolation of anaerobic bacteria from 212 consecutive wound specimens. (Brucella blood agar and KVL agar plates were used in this study.) RapID ANA II System, API 20A, special potency disks, and GLC were used for identification. Of the 212 specimens cultured, 87 yielded anaerobic bacteria comprising 182 strains. 39 strains failed to grow in the anaerobic chamber but grew on the OxyPlates. These strains were predominantly Peptostreptococcus sp, Eubacterium sp, and Propionibacterium sp. 14 strains grew in the anaerobic chamber, but not on the OxyPlates. No apparent trend was noted.

In conclusion, the Oxyrase anaerobic plate system appeared to be an excellent alternative to the conventional anaerobic chamber for the isolation and identification of clinically significant anaerobes found in human samples obviating the need for separate anaerobic-aerobic workstations, expensive anaerobic apparatus, and additional incubator space. Our in-house cost analysis revealed that OxyPlates were somewhat less expensive than the utilization of an anaerobic chamber.