1887

Abstract

Summary

The technique of performing the Dienes test is described, as well as its application to the investigation of an outbreak of cross-infection with . The test was found to possess a high degree of specificity. The frequency of reactions of identity among 48 proteus isolates obtained from unrelated sources and tested against themselves was 1 in 70, based on a total number of 1128 tests. These 48 isolates could be grouped into 35 “Dienes strains”

Compatible reactions were obtained between strains possessing major H-antigenic differences. This finding indicates that the relation between H-antigenic structure and inhibition in the Dienes test is probably not as close as has been previously suggested.

In a study of children attending hospital for up to 2 yr, strains of proteus repeatedly isolated from a child were almost always compatible with each other in the Dienes test. This indicates that each child retained his or her own strain and that the strains behaved consistently in relation to the Dienes test during the period of the study.

It is concluded that the specificity, reproducibility and simplicity of the Dienes test make it of great value for the detection of cross-infection with proteus, particularly in an ordinary hospital laboratory. The suggestion is made that the Dienes phenomenon could be due to colicine-like substances and that it could form the basis of a typing system.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-471
1969-11-01
2024-04-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/2/4/medmicro-2-4-471.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-471&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Belyavin G. 1951 J. Gen. Microbiol 5:197
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cowan S. T., Steel K. J. 1965 Manual for the identification of medical bacteria. Cambridge
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Cunliffe A. C., Krickler Maureen S. 1955 Atti VI Congr. int. Microbiol (Roma, 1953) 1:861
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Dienes L. 1946 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med 63:265
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Dienes L. 1947 Ibid. 66:97
    [Google Scholar]
  6. France Diana R., Markham N. P. 1968 J. Clin. Path 21:97
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hughes W. H. 1957 J. Gen. Microbiol 17:49
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Kauffmann F., Perch Beate. 1947 Acta path, microbiol. scand 24:135
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Kippax P. W. 1957 J. Clin. Path 10:211 (August)
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Lányi B. 1956 Acta microbiol. hung 3:417
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Perch Beate. 1948 Acta path, microbiol. scand 25:703
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Story P. 1954 J. Path. Bact 68:55
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-471
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-471
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error