Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Minimum requirements for a rapid and reliable routine identification and antibiogram of Fusobacterium necrophorum

  • Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three hundred fifty-seven isolates of Fusobacterium necrophorum from human infections in Denmark were consecutively collected over a 3 year period for the purpose of establishing the minimum requirements for rapid and reliable routine identification of Fusobacterium necrophorum using phenotypic characters. The first 40 isolates were fully characterized by the most common phenotypic tests mentioned in the literature, while the last 317 where identified solely by the established minimum requirements for rapid and reliable routine identification of Fusobacterium necrophorum. All but one isolate were identical in all phenotypic tests. The outlying strain differed in morphology and the ability to agglutinate erythrocytes. On the basis of our findings it should be possible within 3–4 days to identify and differentiate F. necrophorum from other species including other Fusobacterium spp. by the unique but subspecies specific colony morphology, susceptibility to kanamycin and metronidazole, the smell of butyric acid, chartreuse colour fluorescence, and β-haemolysis on horse blood agar. Three-hundred fifty-six isolates were identified as F. necrophorum subsp. funduliforme while one strain was F. necrophorum subsp. necrophorum. The species and subspecies level was confirmed for the first 40 isolates by real-time PCR. MIC in mg/l was determined for the 40 isolates. MIC90 was 0.047 for penicillin, 0.047 for clindamycin, 0.25 for metronidazole, 0.38 for cefuroxime, >32 for imipenem, 0.012 for meropenem, and 2 for erythromycin. All 357 isolates were susceptible to penicillin and metronidazole indicating that these antibiotics are still the drugs of choice in antibiotic therapy of F. necrophorum infections, but therapy with clindamycin may be an alternative. Erythromycin should be avoided.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lemierre A (1936) On certain septicaemias due to anaerobic organisms. Lancet 1:701–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jousimies-Somer H, Savolainen S, Makitie A et al (1993) Bacteriologic findings in peritonsillar abscesses in young adults. Clin Infect Dis 16(Suppl 4):292–298

    Google Scholar 

  3. Aliyu SH, Marriott RK, Curran MD et al (2004) Real-time PCR investigation into the importance of Fusobacterium necrophorum as a cause of acute pharyngitis in general practice. J Med Microbiol 53(Pt 10):1029–1035

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Batty A, Wren MW (2005) Prevalence of Fusobacterium necrophorum and other upper respiratory tract pathogens isolated from throat swabs. Br J Biomed Sci 62(2):66–70

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Jensen A, Hagelskjaer KL, Prag J (2007) Detection of Fusobacterium necrophorum subsp. funduliforme in tonsillitis in young adults by real-time PCR. Clin Microbiol Infect 13(7):695–701

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hagelskjaer Kristensen L, Prag J (2000) Human necrobacillosis, with emphasis on Lemierre’s syndrome. Clin Infect Dis 31(2):524–532

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Nagaraja TG, Narayanan SK, Stewart GC et al (2005) Fusobacterium necrophorum infections in animals: pathogenesis and pathogenic mechanisms. Anaerobe 11:239–246

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Kristensen LH, Prag J (2007) Incidence of Lemierre’s syndrome in Denmark—a prospective epidemiological and clinical survey from 1998 to 2001. EJCMID-D-07-00449

  9. Health Protection Agency (2004) UK national external quality assessment service for microbiology. Distribution 1817

  10. Jousimies-Somer H, Svenstrup HF, Citron DM, Baron EJ, Wexler HM, Finegold SM (2002) Anaerobic bacteriology manual. Star Publishing Company, Belmont, CA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  11. Murray PR, Baron EJ, Jorgensen JH, Pfaller MA, Yolken RH (2003) Manual of clinical microbiology. ASM Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  12. Aliyu SH, Yong PF, Newport MJ et al (2005) Molecular diagnosis of Fusobacterium necrophorum infection (Lemierre’s syndrome). Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 24(3):226–229

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hagelskjaer LH, Prag J, Malczynski J et al (1998) Incidence and clinical epidemiology of necrobacillosis, including Lemierre’s syndrome, in Denmark 1990–1995. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 17(8):561–565

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lustig LR, Cusick BC, Cheung SW et al (1995) Lemierre’s syndrome: two cases of postanginal sepsis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 112(6):767–772

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Statens Seruminstitut (1993) Handbook of culture media. Statens Seruminstitut Media Department, Copenhagen. www.ssi.dk

  16. Beerens H (1954) Procédé de Différenciation Entre Spherophorus necrophorus (Schmorl 1891) et Spherophorus funduliformis (Halle 1898). Ann Inst Pasteur (Paris) 86(3):384–386

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Leugers CM, Clover R (1995) Lemierre syndrome: postanginal sepsis. J Am Board Fam Pract 8(5):384–391

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jacobs JA, Hendriks JJE, Verschure PDMM et al (1993) Meningitis due to Fusobacterium necrophorum subspecies necrophorum. Case report and review of the literature. Infection 21(1):57–66

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Amoako KK, Goto Y, Shinjo T (1993) Comparison of extracellular enzymes of Fusobacterium necrophorum subsp. necrophorum and Fusobacterium necrophorum subsp. funduliforme. J Clin Microbiol 31(8):2244–2247

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Shinjo T, Fujisawa T, Mitsuoka T (1991) Proposal of two subspecies of Fusobacterium necrophorum (Flugge) Moore and Holdeman: Fusobacterium necrophorum subsp. necrophorum subsp. nov., nom. rev. (Ex Flugge 1886), and Fusobacterium necrophorum subsp funduliforme subsp. nov., nom. rev. (Ex Halle 1898). Int J Syst Bacteriol 41(3):395–397

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Brown R, Lough HG, Poxton IR (1997) Phenotypic characteristics and lipopolysaccharides of human and animal isolates of Fusobacterium necrophorum. J Med Microbiol 46(10):873–878

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hall V, Duerden BI, Magee JT et al (1997) A comparative study of Fusobacterium necrophorum strains from human and animal sources by phenotypic reactions, pyrolysis mass spectrometry and SDS-PAGE. J Med Microbiol 46(10):865–871

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Smith GR, Thornton EA (1993) Pathogenicity of Fusobacterium necrophorum strains from man and animals. Epidemiol Infect 110(3):499–506

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Smith GR, Thornton EA (1997) Classification of human and animal strains of Fusobacterium necrophorum by their pathogenic effects in mice. J Med Microbiol 46(10):879–882

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Tan ZL, Nagaraja TG, Chengappa MM (1994) Biochemical and biological characterization of ruminal Fusobacterium necrophorum. FEMS Microbiol Lett 120(1–2):81–86

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Tan ZL, Nagaraja TG, Chengappa MM (1996) Fusobacterium necrophorum infections: virulence factors, pathogenic mechanism and control measures. Vet Res Commun 20(2):113–140

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Epaulard O, Brion JP, Stahl JP et al (2006) The changing pattern of Fusobacterium infections in humans: recent experience with Fusobacterium bacteraemia. Clin Microbiol Infect 12(2):178–181

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kuduvalli PM, Jukka CM, Stallwood M et al (2005) Fusobacterium necrophorum-induced sepsis: an unusual case of Lemierre’s syndrome. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 49(4):572–575

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Goldstein EJC, Citron DM, Warren Y et al (1999) In vitro activity of gemifloxacin (SB 265805) against anaerobes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 43(9):2231–2235

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Jousimies-Somer H, Summanen PH, Finegold SM (1999) Bacteroides, Porphyromonas, Prevotella, Fusobacterium, and other Gram-negative rods and cocci. In: Murray E, Baron EJ, Pfaller FC, Tenover FC, Yolken RH (eds) Manual of clinical microbiology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, pp 690–711

  31. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (1997) Methods for antimicrobial susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria. Approved standards. NCCLS publication no. M11-A4. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Villanova, PA

  32. Spangler SK, Jacobs MR, Appelbaum PC (1996) Susceptibility of anaerobic bacteria to trovafloxacin: comparison with other quinolones and non-quinolone antibiotics. Infect Dis Clin Pract 5:101–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Appelbaum PC, Spangler SK, Jacobs MR (1991) Susceptibilities of 394 Bacteroides fragilis, non-B. fragilis group bacteroides species, and Fusobacterium species to newer antimicrobial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 35(6):1214–1218

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Goldstein EJC, Citron DM, Merriam VV et al (1999) Activities of gemifloxacin (SB 265805, LB20304) compared to those of other oral antimicrobial agents against unusual anaerobes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 43(11):2726–2730

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Nyfors S, Kononen E, Syrjanen R et al (2003) Emergence of penicillin resistance among Fusobacterium nucleatum populations of commensal oral flora during early childhood. J Antimicrob Chemother 51(1):107–112

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Brazier JS (2002) Fusobacterium necrophorum infections in man. Rev Med Microbiol 13(4):141–149

    Google Scholar 

  37. Hecht D (1999) Susceptibility testing of anaerobic bacteria. In: Murray E, Baron EJ, Pfaller FC, Tenover FC, Yolken RH (eds) Manual of clinical microbiology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, DC, pp 1555–1562

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all the Danish Departments of Clinical Microbiology and clinical departments who provided the F. necrophorum isolates and helped locate records from the clinical departments. We also thank Niels Nørskov-Lauritsen for critical advice with the manuscript and Klinisk Foto, Regionshospitalet Viborg for assisting with the figures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Clinical Microbiology, Viborg Hospital, Heibergs Allé 4, 8800, Viborg, Denmark

    A. Jensen, L. Hagelskjaer Kristensen, H. Nielsen & J. Prag

Authors
  1. A. Jensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. L. Hagelskjaer Kristensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. J. Prag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Jensen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jensen, A., Hagelskjaer Kristensen, L., Nielsen, H. et al. Minimum requirements for a rapid and reliable routine identification and antibiogram of Fusobacterium necrophorum . Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 27, 557–563 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-008-0468-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-008-0468-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation