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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guo, Dacheng, Xi, Yu, Wang, Shanmei, Wang, Zeyu
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