This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Johnson, C C Articles by Finegold, S M Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Johnson, C C Articles by Finegold, S M

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1985 November; 22(5): 799-802

Bacteroides gracilis, an important anaerobic bacterial pathogen.

C C Johnson, J F Reinhardt, M A Edelstein, M E Mulligan, W L George and S M Finegold

ABSTRACT

Clinical isolates of agar-pitting, formate-fumarate-requiring, anaerobic gram-negative bacilli were recharacterized in consideration of the species descriptions of Bacteroides ureolyticus and the newly described B. gracilis, Campylobacter concisus, and Wolinella sp. During an 11-year period, 7.5% (101 of 1,341) of all specimens yielding anaerobes were found to contain an organism in this group. Of the 71 isolates that were available for study, 43 were B. ureolyticus, 23 were B. gracilis, and 5 were in the Wolinella-C. concisus group. The role in infection and patterns of antimicrobial susceptibility for B. ureolyticus and B. gracilis were studied. Review of the clinical data indicated that 83% of B. gracilis strains were recovered from patients with serious visceral or head and neck infection, whereas 73% of B. ureolyticus isolates were recovered from superficial soft-tissue or bone infections. The strains of B. ureolyticus were uniformly susceptible to the tested antimicrobial agents. B. gracilis, however, showed some striking resistance, with penicillin active against only 67% and the cephalosporins active against 67 to 84% of the isolates tested. The association of B. gracilis with serious deep-tissue infection, coupled with the relatively high frequency of antibiotic resistance, indicates that it is an important, previously unrecognized, pathogen.

---

J Clin Microbiol. 1985 November; 22(5): 799-802

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Kommedal, O., Kvello, K., Skjastad, R., Langeland, N., Wiker, H. G. (2009). Direct 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing from Clinical Specimens, with Special Focus on Polybacterial Samples and Interpretation of Mixed DNA Chromatograms. J. Clin. Microbiol. 47: 3562-3568 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Wexler, H. M. (2007). Bacteroides: the Good, the Bad, and the Nitty-Gritty. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 20: 593-621 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Macuch, P.J., Tanner, A.C.R. (2000). Campylobacter Species in Health, Gingivitis, and Periodontitis. JDR 79: 785-792 [Abstract]  
• Sunday, G.J., Gillespie, M.J., Motley, S.T., Zambon, J.J. (1991). Atypical Structure of the 23S Ribosomal RNA Molecule in Certain Oral Bacteria. JDR 70: 961-965 [Abstract]