JCM Figure table search 04
Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
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 Reinhardt, D. J.
Right arrow Articles by Popovic, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Reinhardt, D. J.
Right arrow Articles by Popovic, T.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, January 1998, p. 207-210, Vol. 36, No. 1
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.

Antitoxin-in-Membrane and Antitoxin-in-Well Assays for Detection of Toxigenic Corynebacterium diphtheriae

D. J. Reinhardt,1,* A. Lee,1 and T. Popovic2

Department of Biology, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia 30303,1 and Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Diseases, National Center for Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia 303332

Received 16 June 1997/Returned for modification 15 September 1997/Accepted 8 October 1997

The Elek culture plate precipitin test is routinely used for the detection of exotoxin from toxigenic strains of Corynebacterium diphtheriae. Recently, the World Health Organization standardized this test to ensure accuracy, reliability, and reproducibility. In this study, we further modified the standard Elek test by using the antitoxin-in-membrane (AIM) and antitoxin-in-well (AIW) approaches. In the AIM tests, each strain was stabbed and streaked backwards and away from a point approximately 7 mm from the edge of a sterile cellulose acetate-cellulose nitrate filter membrane disk (pore size, 0.45 µm; diameter, 25 mm) containing 25 IU of diphtheria antitoxin. For AIW tests, a central well (diameter, 5 mm) containing 9 µl of antitoxin (4.5 IU) was surrounded by eight equidistant stab-streaks of each strain placed 10 mm from the well. In both methods, precipitin bands of identity typically were noted after 24- and 48-h incubations at 37°C. Both toxigenic and weak toxigenic strains gave clear and reproducible results. Compared with the standard Elek test, the AIM and AIW tests each use 50% less medium and 75 and 87% less antitoxin, respectively. AIM has the potential to test up to 14 isolates and AIW has the potential to test up to 24 isolates on the same plate. Furthermore, clearer positives were noted with weak toxigenic strains. In a blinded test of 209 verified C. diphtheriae isolates, a 99.5% agreement with the standard Elek test was obtained overall. Both modifications conserve reagents and medium, permit the simultaneous testing of a larger number of strains, and may be particularly suitable for reference laboratories or hospitals involved in diphtheria epidemic settings.


* Corresponding author. Phone: (404) 651-2259. Fax: (404) 651-2509.


Journal of Clinical Microbiology, January 1998, p. 207-210, Vol. 36, No. 1
0095-1137/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.



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 © 1998 by the American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.