1887

Abstract

Summary

Strains of isolated from toxic epidermal necrolysis and Ritter’s disease (named collectively “Ritter’s type” of TEN) and from extensive cases of impetigo contagiosa, in which the diagnosis of Ritter’s type of TEN was considered seriously, were assigned to group E (extensive lesions) and were compared with strains of isolated from unequivocal impetigo contagiosa (group L—localised lesions); 24 of the 26 isolates examined belonged to phage-group II.

Strains from groups E and L were generally similar in their patterns of proteolytic activity, low incidence of positive egg-yolk reaction, possession of lipase and production of hyaluronidase. The difference lay in the many isolates in group E that produced a low-titre lysin active against rabbit red cells that was not α-haemolysin. The average titre of lysin active against rabbit erythrocytes in group E was 355 MHD per mi and in group L 1008 MHD per mi. Reasons are given for supposing that this low titre rabbit cell lysin is identical with staphylococcal δ-toxin. It is suggested that δ-toxin may play a part in the pathogenesis of Ritter’s type of TEN and extensive impetigo.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-479
1969-11-01
2022-01-20
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/2/4/medmicro-2-4-479.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-479&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Bernheimer A. W. 1969 In Microbial toxins. ed. by Ajl S. J., Montie T. C., Kadis S. New York: in press;
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Dorfmann A. 1955 In Methods in enzymology. ed. by Colowick S. P., Kaplan N. O. New York: vol. 1 p. 166
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Elek S. D. 1959 Staphylococcus pyogenes, Edinburgh
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Elek S. D., Levy E. 1950 J. Path. Bact 62:541
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Elek S. D., Levy E. 1954 Ibid. 68:31
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Gillespie E. H. 1943 Mon. Bull. Min. Hlth 2:19
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Gladstone G. P. 1966 Postępy Mikrobiol 5:145
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Hallander H. O. 1968 Acta path, microbiol. scand 72:586
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Holzel A., Jacobs S. I. 1966 Schweiz, med. Wschr 96:427
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Jefferson J. 1967 Br. Med. J 2:802
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Lominski I., Arbuthnott J. P. 1962 J. Path. Bact 83:515
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Lowney E. D., Baublis J. V., Kreye G. M., Harrell E. R., McKenzie A. R. 1967 Archs Derm 95:359
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Lyell A. 1967 Br. J. Derm 79:662
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Lyell A., Dick Heather, Alexander J. O’D. 1969 Lancet 1:787
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Parker M. T. 1958 J. Hyg., Camb 56:238
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Parker M. T., Simmons L. E. 1959 J. Gen. Microbiol 21:457
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Parker M. T., Tomlinson A. J. H., Williams R. E. O. 1955 J. Hyg., Camb 53:458
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Saggers B. A., Stewart G. T. 1968 J. Bact 96:1006
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Samuels M. J. 1967 Br. J. Derm 79:672
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Spittlehouse K. E. 1955 Lancet 2:378
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Tomlinson A. J. H., Parker M. T. 1956 Nature, Lond 177:895
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Tyson R. G., Ushinski S. C., Kisilevsky R. 1966 Amer. J. Dis. Child 111:386
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Wiseman G. H., Caird J. D. 1968 Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Med 128:428
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-479
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/00222615-2-4-479
Loading

Data & Media loading...

Most cited this month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error