The biochemical, serological and hæmag‐glutinating reactions of “<i>Hæmophilus vaginalis</i>”

Edmunds, P. N.

doi:10.1002/path.1700830211

Cited by 36 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When considering the design of serological tests, it is important to recognize that G. vaginalis strains isolated from different patients exhibit antigenic differences (20,57,60,76,100 Impaired immunity has been suggested as a factor in the association between G. vaginalis and urinary tract infections of kidney transplant patients (69,169) and between G. vaginalis and vaginitis emphysematosa (112).…”

Section: Transmission Of Bacteria Associated With Vaginosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hydrogen peroxide inhibits G. vaginalis (4,6,56,107,108,116,174) and also most UCNC strains (174), as seen by the absence of growth in a zone surrounding a drop of 3% H202 on a blood-free agar culture. The low concentration of bacitracin in Taxo A disks inhibits G. vaginalis (6,81,107,211,243 (60,174,228). Piot et al (176) emphasized the importance of using large inocula from cultures no older that 24 h. Detection of acid production during growth may require incubation of cultures for up to 5 days.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The report (143) Vaginal epithelial cells (VECs) scraped from the vaginal wall were used in studies of in vitro adhesion (135,166,203,214,215). Mardh Hemagglutination of one or more species of erythrocytes that occurred at 5°C and was reversed upon warming was described by Edmunds (60). Ison and Easmon (98) (205).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Gardnerella vaginalis: characteristics, clinical considerations, and controversies

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The clinical significance, Gram stain reaction, and genus affiliation of Gardnerella vaginalis have been controversial since Gardner and Dukes described the organism as the cause of "nonspecific vaginitis," a common disease of women which is now called bacterial vaginosis. The organism was named G. vaginalis when taxonomic studies showed that it was unrelated to bacteria in various genera including Haemophilus and Corynebacterium. Electron microscopy and chemical analyses have elucidated the organism's gram-variable reaction. Controversy over the etiology of bacterial vaginosis was largely resolved by (i) studies using improved media and methods for the isolation and identification of bacteria in vaginal fluids and (ii) standardization of criteria for clinical and laboratory diagnosis. Besides G. vaginalis, Mobiluncus spp., Mycoplasma hominis, and certain obligate anaerobes are now acknowledged as participants in bacterial vaginosis. The finding that G. vaginalis, Mobiluncus spp., and M. hominis inhabit the rectum indicates a potential source of autoinfection in addition to sexual transmission. Extravaginal infections with G. vaginalis are increasingly recognized, especially when the toxic anticoagulant polyanetholesulfonate is omitted from blood cultures and when urine cultures are incubated anaerobically for 48 h. The finding that mares harbor G. vaginalis suggests that an equine model can be developed for studies of Gardnerella pathogenesis.

show abstract

Section: Transmission Of Bacteria Associated With Vaginosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gardnerella vaginalis: characteristics, clinical considerations, and controversies

1992

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reaction to Gram's stain is variable so that even this basic tool for identification is of little help. Carbohydrate-fermentation tests often pose problems of reproducibility (Edmunds, 1962;Dunkelberg, Skaggs and Kellogg, 1970;Bailey, Voss and Smith, 1979;Greenwood and Pickett, 1979;Piot et al, 1980), and although glucose, maltose and starch are almost invariably fermented (Dunkelberg, 1977), this is of little use for identification purposes as these carbohydrates are also fermented by a wide variety of other bacteria (Piot et al, 1980). It has been suggested that the ability of G. vaginalis to produce diffuse P-haemolysis on human-but not horse-blood agar can be used to give a presumptive identification (Greenwood et al, 1977;Bailey et al, 1979;Wells and Goei, 1981).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The identification of Gardnerella vaginalis

Taylor

Phillips

1983

Journal of Medical Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY. A collection of 72 strains of catalase-negative grampositive, -negative and -variable cocco-bacilli isolated from samples of vaginal discharge from women with non-specific vaginal infection was examined in an attempt to develop an identification system for Gardnerella vaginalis that could be used in a diagnostic laboratory. Carbohydrate fermentation tests were found to be poorly reproducible and of little differentiating value. Enzyme tests were found similarly unhelpful, as were many antibiotic-susceptibility and chemical-inhibition tests. However, seven tests-susceptibility to trimethoprim and two concentrations of metronidazole, growth in the presence of 2% (w/v) sodium chloride and on nutrient agar, lactic acid production from glucose and P-haemolysis on human-blood agar-were used successfully in this study to separate G. vaginalis from catalase-negative coryneforms and lactobacilli. Of these tests, susceptibility to trimethoprim and metronidazole together with P-haemolysis on human blood agar are the most likely to provide a rapid, accurate identification. A possible identification scheme is outlined.

show abstract

“…Several authors suggested that the bacterium called H. vaginalis should be placed in a new genus (7,16,19), and in 1980, Greenwood and Pickett proposed that the bacterium be reclassified in the genus Gardnerella as G . vaginalis (10).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%