Patton C M, Barrett T J, Morris G K
J Clin Microbiol. 1985 Oct;22(4):558-65. doi: 10.1128/jcm.22.4.558-565.1985.
We compared two Campylobacter serotyping systems by using 1,405 isolates of Campylobacter collected from human, animal, and environmental sources during epidemiologic investigations and special studies. We found 96.1% of isolates to be typable by the Penner method for heat-stable antigens, which involved the use of an indirect hemagglutination technique, and 92.1% of isolates to be typable by the Lior method for heat-labile antigens, which involved the use of a slide agglutination technique and absorbed antisera. Absorbed antisera were not required for the Penner method, making that method less difficult to implement. The Lior method was simpler to perform and gave more rapid results than did the Penner method. Cultures frequently reacted in multiple antisera with the Penner method, whereas multiple reactions were rare with the Lior method. Thus, results were easier to interpret with the Lior system. Strains of a single serotype in one system were sometimes found to be multiple serotypes in the other system; hence, the two methods have the potential to be complementary. Both systems were comparable in serotyping isolates from human and nonhuman sources and for evaluating the relationship of strains collected during outbreak investigations.
我们通过使用在流行病学调查和专项研究期间从人类、动物和环境来源收集的1405株弯曲杆菌分离株,对两种弯曲杆菌血清分型系统进行了比较。我们发现,96.1%的分离株可用Penner热稳定抗原方法分型,该方法采用间接血凝技术;92.1%的分离株可用Lior热不稳定抗原方法分型,该方法采用玻片凝集技术和吸收抗血清。Penner方法不需要吸收抗血清,使得该方法实施起来难度较小。Lior方法操作更简单,结果比Penner方法得出得更快。使用Penner方法时培养物常与多种抗血清发生反应,而使用Lior方法时很少出现多种反应。因此,Lior系统的结果更容易解释。在一个系统中为单一血清型的菌株有时在另一个系统中被发现为多种血清型;因此,这两种方法有可能相互补充。在对来自人类和非人类来源的分离株进行血清分型以及评估疫情调查期间收集的菌株之间的关系方面,这两种系统具有可比性。