JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Garaizar, J
Right arrow Articles by Pitt, T L
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Garaizar, J
Right arrow Articles by Pitt, T L
J Clin Microbiol. 1991 July; 29(7): 1303-1307

Comparison of ribotyping with conventional methods for the type identification of Enterobacter cloacae.

J Garaizar, M E Kaufmann and T L Pitt

Division of Hospital Infection, Central Public Health Laboratory, London, United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT

An Escherichia coli rRNA probe was compared with a combination of O serotyping, phage susceptibility, and biotype pattern for the type identification of strains of Enterobacter cloacae. Forty-five isolates of E. cloacae from 36 patients in nine hospitals were examined. By conventional typing, only 26 (57.7%) could be assigned to a specific serotype and 6 (13.3%) were autoagglutinating owing to rough lipopolysaccharide antigens. All isolates could be assigned to one of three biotypes, but many phage sensitivity patterns were evident. Twenty-nine distinct strains were identified by combined typing. Probing of EcoRI and BamHI digests of chromosomal DNA with a cDNA copy of E. coli rRNA proved to be highly discriminating between strains. Thirty different ribotypes based on 28 bands were recorded. Overall, agreement between the ribotyping and combined typing methods was good (84.4%), and discrepancies were generally confined to serologically unclassifiable strains and variability in biotype codes. Ribotyping was reproducible, and five of six pairs of isolates from the same and different patients gave identical hybridization profiles on separate occasions. We conclude that ribotyping is a highly discriminatory and reproducible method for the typing of E. cloacae, but in most outbreaks it offers little increase in discrimination over traditional methods.


J Clin Microbiol. 1991 July; 29(7): 1303-1307




This article has been cited by other articles:




Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
Clin. Vaccine Immunol. ALL ASM JOURNALS

Copyright © 1991 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.