Cargando…
Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae?
BACKGROUND: For a long time, the Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test has been a standard test for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae, and a positive result for S.agalactiae has been considered sensitive enough. METHODS: To confirm whether a positive CAMP test is a requirement fo...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6318942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30606123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3561-3 |
_version_ | 1783384976957374464 |
---|---|
author | Guo, Dacheng Xi, Yu Wang, Shanmei Wang, Zeyu |
author_facet | Guo, Dacheng Xi, Yu Wang, Shanmei Wang, Zeyu |
author_sort | Guo, Dacheng |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: For a long time, the Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test has been a standard test for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae, and a positive result for S.agalactiae has been considered sensitive enough. METHODS: To confirm whether a positive CAMP test is a requirement for the identification of S.agalactiae, five suspected CAMP-negative S.agalactiae isolates from two hospitals, confirmed as Gram-positive and catalase-negative streptococci, were verified by the CAMP test in three batches of plates from two manufacturers and identified by the Phoenix system, MALDI-TOF MS, the PCR assay and the 16S rDNA gene sequencing. RESULTS: All five suspected strains were S.agalactiae, four of which were CAMP-negative and one of which was not S.agalactiae by the PCR assay. CONCLUSIONS: A positive CAMP test was lacking sensitivity for the identification of S.agalactiae, and the question of whether the cfb gene is worthy of targeting should be further studied. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6318942 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63189422019-01-08 Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae? Guo, Dacheng Xi, Yu Wang, Shanmei Wang, Zeyu BMC Infect Dis Research Article BACKGROUND: For a long time, the Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test has been a standard test for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae, and a positive result for S.agalactiae has been considered sensitive enough. METHODS: To confirm whether a positive CAMP test is a requirement for the identification of S.agalactiae, five suspected CAMP-negative S.agalactiae isolates from two hospitals, confirmed as Gram-positive and catalase-negative streptococci, were verified by the CAMP test in three batches of plates from two manufacturers and identified by the Phoenix system, MALDI-TOF MS, the PCR assay and the 16S rDNA gene sequencing. RESULTS: All five suspected strains were S.agalactiae, four of which were CAMP-negative and one of which was not S.agalactiae by the PCR assay. CONCLUSIONS: A positive CAMP test was lacking sensitivity for the identification of S.agalactiae, and the question of whether the cfb gene is worthy of targeting should be further studied. BioMed Central 2019-01-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6318942/ /pubmed/30606123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3561-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Guo, Dacheng Xi, Yu Wang, Shanmei Wang, Zeyu Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae? |
title | Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae? |
title_full | Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae? |
title_fullStr | Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae? |
title_short | Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae? |
title_sort | is a positive christie-atkinson-munch-peterson (camp) test sensitive enough for the identification of streptococcus agalactiae? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6318942/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30606123 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12879-018-3561-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guodacheng isapositivechristieatkinsonmunchpetersoncamptestsensitiveenoughfortheidentificationofstreptococcusagalactiae AT xiyu isapositivechristieatkinsonmunchpetersoncamptestsensitiveenoughfortheidentificationofstreptococcusagalactiae AT wangshanmei isapositivechristieatkinsonmunchpetersoncamptestsensitiveenoughfortheidentificationofstreptococcusagalactiae AT wangzeyu isapositivechristieatkinsonmunchpetersoncamptestsensitiveenoughfortheidentificationofstreptococcusagalactiae |