Medical Microbiology Division, Department of
Pathology, University of Iowa College of Medicine, Iowa City, Iowa
52242
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Proteus mirabilis is the
clinically most important species within the tribe Protease
(1). P. mirabilis accounts for up to 10% of
uncomplicated urinary tract infections, is the fifth most common cause
of nosocomial urinary tract infections, and may also cause wound
infections and sepsis in hospitalized individuals (1,
4, 4a, 8, 11). Importantly, nosocomial
strains of P. mirabilis may manifest resistance to several
antimicrobial agents including extended-spectrum cephalosporins,
fluoroquinolones, and aminoglycosides (4a).
Transmission of resistant strains of P. mirabilis in
hospitals has been documented by ribotyping and pulsed-field gel
electrophoresis (PFGE) (4a).
One characteristic feature of P. mirabilis is its ability to
swarm over the surface of agar medium. This unique feature was used
many years ago to develop a test, the Dienes mutual inhibition test,
for identification of unique strains within the species (3).
The Dienes test for strain discrimination of P. mirabilis is
based on the mutual inhibition of two different strains as they swarm
towards one another on an agar surface (3, 12, 13). If the
two strains are genetically distinct, a clear line of demarcation will
form as the swarming edge of one strain meets the other (Fig.
1). If the two strains are related or
identical, there is no mutual inhibition and the swarming edges merge
with no visible line of demarcation (Fig. 1). Thus, the test can be used as a simple means of determining whether two or more isolates of
P. mirabilis are the same or different (2, 5, 12, 13, 16). The Dienes test has been used as an epidemiologic typing method to detect cross-infection due to P. mirabilis
(12-14); however, the discriminatory power of the test as a
strain marker has never been compared to modern molecular typing
methods such as ribotyping or PFGE.

View larger version (148K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Dienes test showing three different strains, A, B, and
C. Note the absence of Dienes lines between identical strains A and A,
B and B, and C and C, respectively. Likewise, note the distinct lines
of demarcation between strains A, B, and C.
|
|
In the present study, a collection of 63 clinical isolates of P. mirabilis was used to evaluate the Dienes test in comparison to
ribotyping performed using the automated RiboPrinter Microbial Characterization System (Qualicon, Wilmington, Del.). Isolates that
were indistinguishable by the Dienes test and/or ribotyping were
further characterized by PFGE. The discriminatory power of the Dienes
test and of ribotyping was assessed.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Bacterial strains.
A collection of 63 clinical isolates of
P. mirabilis was studied. This collection consisted of
consecutive clinical isolates (one per patient) obtained from specimens
of urine, sputum, wounds, blood, and other normally sterile body fluids
submitted for culture to the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory of the
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics (Iowa City, Iowa) between
January 1997 and August 1999. All isolates were indole negative and
produced typical swarming growth on blood agar. Identification to
species level was performed using the Vitek Gram-Negative
Identification System (bioMerieux Vitek, Hazelwood, Mo.). All isolates
were stored on agar slants at room temperature until used in the study.
Dienes test.
The Dienes test was performed as described by
Bale and Hollis (2). Isolates were subcultured from agar
slants into sheep blood agar plates (Remel, Lenexa, Kans.) and
incubated at 35°C for 24 h. Isolates to be compared were spot
inoculated from the original blood agar plate onto the surface of a new
blood agar plate. Between three and six different isolates were tested
on a single plate (Fig. 1). Inoculated plates were incubated at 35°C in air for 16 to 18 h before reading. The plates were then
examined with reflected light for the presence or absence of distinct
"Dienes lines" forming between each pair of isolates (Fig. 1). The
presence of Dienes lines between two isolates indicated that the
isolates were unrelated and thus represented different Dienes types.
The lack of Dienes lines indicated that the isolates were
indistinguishable and represented the same Dienes type. Each isolate
was tested against all other isolates in the collection and by this
process was designated Dienes type A, B, C, and so on through type BC (Table 1).
Ribotyping.
Ribotyping was performed using the RiboPrinter
Microbial Characterization System (Qualicon) according to the
manufacturer's instructions and as described earlier (6,
10). Isolates were inoculated into tubes containing lysis buffer,
placed in a heating block at 80°C for 30 min, and then transferred to
the RiboPrinter instrument. Within the RiboPrinter, the remaining steps
were entirely automated including cleavage of the DNA using the
restriction enzyme EcoRI, size separation using gel
electrophoresis, and modified Southern blotting. The DNA fragments were
then hybridized with a labeled DNA probe derived from the
Escherichia coli rrnB rRNA operon. The bands were detected
using a chemiluminescent substrate. An image was captured using a
customized charge-coupled device camera and electronically transferred
to the systems computer. Each lane of sample data was normalized to a
standard marker set. This normalized output was compared with all
previously determined samples and reference patterns (6).
Similarity coefficients were calculated based upon both band position
and relative banding intensity. Isolates were judged to have the same
ribotype if the similarity coefficient between their patterns was
0.93.
PFGE.
Isolates with the same Dienes type and/or the same
ribotype were evaluated further using PFGE performed as described by
Pfaller et al. (9). Genomic DNA in agarose was digested with
SfiI restriction enzyme, and the resulting fragments were
separated by electrophoresis in 1% agarose on the CHEF-DRII (Bio-Rad,
Richmond, Calif.) with the following conditions: 200 V for 23 h at
switch times ramped from 5 to 40 s. Strains were considered
different by PFGE if more than three bands were different (6,
15).
Calculations of discrimination index (DI).
Hunter's
generalized formula was used to calculate the DI for the Dienes test,
ribotyping, and PFGE (7). The DI is based on the probability
that two unrelated strains sampled from the test population will be
placed into different groups.
 |
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
The 63 isolates constituted 53 different Dienes types and 52 different ribotype patterns (Table 1 and Fig. 1 and
2). Forty isolates represented 40 distinctly different strains based upon both Dienes test and ribotype
profiles. The remaining 23 isolates included 13 different Dienes types
and 12 different ribotypes. Further analysis of these isolates using
PFGE identified 14 different PFGE types (Table 1 and Fig.
3). Four clusters of two to four isolates
each (10 isolates total) identified by the Dienes test (Dienes types A,
E, P, and W) were found to include nine different strains by ribotyping
and eight different strains by PFGE. Conversely, the six isolates with
ribotype 855.7 and PFGE type 4 represented Dienes types C (two
isolates), AG (two isolates), AH (one isolate), and AI (one isolate).
One additional cluster of three isolates defined by Dienes type U and
ribotype 855.5 contained two isolates with PFGE type 13 and one with
PFGE type 12. Finally, two clusters of two isolates each defined by
ribotypes 858.2 and 851.8 contained isolates with four different Dienes
types and four different PFGE types.

View larger version (73K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Ribotype profiles of 10 different isolates of P. mirabilis. Lane 1, ribotype 851.4; lane 2, ribotype 851.8; lanes
3, 8, and 10, ribotype 855.7; lanes 4 and 6, ribotype 858.2; lane 5, ribotype 859.5; lanes 7 and 9, ribotype 637.8. Molecular size markers
in terms of kilobase pairs are shown at the left of the figure.
|
|

View larger version (106K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
PFGE profiles of 10 different isolates of P. mirabilis (same order as in Fig. 2). Lane 1, PFGE type 16; lane 2, PFGE type 3; lanes 3, 8, and 10, PFGE type 4; lane 4, PFGE type 8; lane
5, PFGE type 17; lane 6, PFGE type 6; lane 7, PFGE type 11; lane 9, PFGE type 9.
|
|
Both the Dienes test and ribotyping were highly discriminating, with
the largest cluster identified by each method constituting only 6.3%
(Dienes) to 9.5% (ribotyping) of the isolates (Table 2). The discriminatory power of each
method was essentially the same, with DIs of 0.980 and 0.979 for the
Dienes test and ribotyping, respectively (Table 2). Although PFGE was
performed on only a selected group of isolates, the DI of this method
was 0.992 (data not shown) consistent with previous reports documenting
the excellent discriminatory power of this method (6).
The goal of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of the Dienes
test as an epidemiological typing method for P. mirabilis and to provide the first comparison of this phenotypic typing method
with DNA-based typing methods such as ribotyping and PFGE. The
discriminatory power of each method was determined with a collection of
clinical isolates which were likely to be heterogeneous.
Both the Dienes test and ribotyping typed all isolates, and their
discriminatory powers were essentially identical. The discriminatory power of a typing method is defined as its ability to distinguish between unrelated strains and is determined by the number of types defined by the test method and the relative frequencies of those types
(7). The DI as described by Hunter (7) provides a means of comparing different typing methods and is based on the probability that two unrelated isolates would be placed into two different typing groups. A DI of >0.90 is desirable if typing results
are to be interpreted with confidence (7).
Since most of the strains (84%) had different Dienes types, it is
obvious that this simple phenotypic typing method was very discriminatory (DI, 0.980). Among the 63 clinical isolates, only three
clusters (two isolates in each cluster) of strains with identical
patterns (Dienes type-ribotype-PFGE type) were found. Whether these
isolates were epidemiologically linked is unknown, but given the fact
that they are indistinguishable by more than one technique and that
PFGE is known to be highly discriminatory and capable of identifying
linked isolates, these isolates likely represent small clusters of
nosocomial transmission.
In contrast with ribotyping and PFGE, the Dienes test is extremely
simple to perform and interpret. It takes advantage of easily observed
properties of P. mirabilis and requires only an agar plate
and an incubator, allowing it to be performed in virtually any
laboratory. As shown in the present study, the different Dienes types
generally represent strains that also differ at the genetic level.
Although several of the small clusters of isolates identified by the
Dienes test were shown subsequently to have different DNA profiles, the
excellent discriminatory power of this typing method makes it a very
practical approach for typing of P. mirabilis. Isolates that
are the same Dienes type may require further study using ribotyping or
PFGE for optimal strain typing.
In conclusion, the Dienes test is a simple and useful method for
epidemiological typing of P. mirabilis. Both ribotyping and PFGE are also highly discriminatory methods; however, the ease of
performing the Dienes test coupled with excellent discriminatory power
makes it the method of choice for initial epidemiologic characterization of P. mirabilis isolates.
We acknowledge the excellent secretarial skills of Kay L. Meyer.
| 1.
|
Aleksic, S., and J. Bockemuhl.
1999.
Yersinia and other Enterobacteriaceae, p. 483-496.
In
P. R. Murray, E. J. Baron, M. A. Pfaller, F. C. Tenover, and R. H. Yolken (ed.), Manual of clinical microbiology, 7th ed. ASM Press, Washington, D.C.
|
| 2.
|
Bale, M. J., and R. J. Hollis.
1992.
Characterization of organisms for epidemiologic purposes: serotyping, pyocin typing, and Dienes test, p. 11.14.1-11.14.2.
In
H. D. Isenberg (ed.), Clinical microbiology procedures handbook, vol. 2. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
|
| 3.
|
Dienes, L.
1946.
Reproductive processes in Proteus cultures.
Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med.
63:265-270.
|
| 4.
|
Doern, G. V.,
R. N. Jones,
M. A. Pfaller,
K. C. Kugler,
M. L. Beach, and The SENTRY Study Group (North America).
1999.
Bacterial pathogens isolated from patients with skin and soft tissue infections: frequency of occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (United States and Canada, 1997).
Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.
34:65-72[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 4a.
| Gales, A. C., R. N. Jones, K. A. Gordon, H. S. Sader, W. W. Wilke, M. L. Beach, M. A. Pfaller, G. V. Doern, and The SENTRY Study
Group (Latin America). 2000. Activity and spectrum of 22 antimicrobial agents tested against urinary tract infection pathogens
in hospitalized patients in Latin America: report from the second year
of the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1998). J. Antimicrob.
Chemother., in press.
|
| 5.
|
Hickman, F. W., and J. J. Farmer, III.
1976.
Differentiation of Proteus mirabilis by bacteriophage typing and the Dienes reaction.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
3:350-358[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Hollis, R. J.,
J. L. Bruce,
S. J. Fritschel, and M. A. Pfaller.
1999.
Comparative evaluation of an automated ribotyping instrument versus pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for epidemiological investigation of clinical isolates.
Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.
34:263-268[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Hunter, D.
1990.
Reproducibility and indices of discriminatory power of microbial typing methods.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
28:1903-1905[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 8.
|
Jones, R. N.,
K. C. Kugler,
M. A. Pfaller,
P. L. Winokur, and The SENTRY Surveillance Group, North America.
1999.
Characteristics of pathogens causing urinary tract infections in hospitals in North America: results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 1997.
Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.
35:55-63[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 9.
|
Pfaller, M. A.,
R. J. Hollis, and H. S. Sader.
1994.
Chromosomal restriction fragment analysis by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis, p. 10.5.c.1-10.5.c.12.
In
H. D. Isenberg (ed.), Clinical microbiology procedures handbook, suppl. 1. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
|
| 10.
|
Pfaller, M. A.,
C. Wendt,
R. J. Hollis,
R. P. Wenzel,
S. J. Fritschel,
J. J. Neubar, and L. A. Herwaldt.
1996.
Comparative evaluation of an automated ribotyping system versus pulsed field gel electrophoresis for epidemiological typing of clinical isolates of Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa from patients with recurrent gram-negative bacteremia.
Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.
25:1-8[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Pfaller, M. A.,
R. N. Jones,
G. V. Doern,
K. Kugler, and The SENTRY Participants Group.
1998.
Bacterial pathogens isolated from patients with blood stream infection: frequencies of occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (United States and Canada, 1997).
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
42:1762-1770[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Senior, B. W.
1977.
Typing of Proteus strains by proticene production and sensitivity.
J. Med. Microbiol.
10:7-17[Abstract].
|
| 13.
|
Skirrow, M. B.
1969.
The Dienes (mutual inhibition) test in the investigation of Proteus infections.
J. Med. Microbiol.
2:471-477[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Story, P.
1954.
Proteus infection in hospitals.
J. Pathol. Bacteriol.
68:55-62[Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Tenover, F. C.,
R. D. Arbeit,
R. V. Goering,
P. A. Mickelson,
B. E. Murray,
D. H. Persing, and B. Swaminathan.
1995.
Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
33:2233-2239[Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Tracy, O., and E. J. Thomson.
1972.
An evaluation of three methods of typing organisms of the genus Proteus.
J. Clin. Pathol.
25:69-72[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|