1989
DOI: 10.1128/cmr.2.4.354
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae: an occupational pathogen

Abstract: Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae is a nonsporulating, gram-positive, rod-shaped bacterium which was identified more than 100 years ago as the etiologic agent of swine erysipelas. Since then, it has been found to cause infection in several dozen species of mammals and other animals. Humans become infected through exposure to infected or contaminated animals or animal products. By far the most common type of human infection is a localized, self-limited cutaneous lesion, erysipeloid. Diffuse cutaneous and systemic in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
171
0
6

Year Published

2006
2006
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 213 publications
(177 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
171
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…The causative agent, Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae, is a Gram-positive rod-shaped bacterium that can induce a variety of clinical diseases in animals and humans. 10,18,19 It is important to distinguish E. rhusiopathiae from Erysipelothrix tonsillarum in slaughterhouses because E. tonsillarum, which is virtually nonpathogenic for swine, 13 is indistinguishable from E. rhusiopathiae using conventional diagnostic bacterial tests. 19 Several methods are routinely used for distinguishing between the 2 bacterial species: multilocus electrophoresis, 3 serotyping, 5 randomly amplified polymorphic DNA pattern, 9 production of neuraminidase, 15 and fermentation pattern of glucose or sucrose.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The causative agent, Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae, is a Gram-positive rod-shaped bacterium that can induce a variety of clinical diseases in animals and humans. 10,18,19 It is important to distinguish E. rhusiopathiae from Erysipelothrix tonsillarum in slaughterhouses because E. tonsillarum, which is virtually nonpathogenic for swine, 13 is indistinguishable from E. rhusiopathiae using conventional diagnostic bacterial tests. 19 Several methods are routinely used for distinguishing between the 2 bacterial species: multilocus electrophoresis, 3 serotyping, 5 randomly amplified polymorphic DNA pattern, 9 production of neuraminidase, 15 and fermentation pattern of glucose or sucrose.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The child in this report also responded favourably to surgical decompression of the joint and antibiotics. This is probably on account of the fact that most strains of this organism are highly susceptible to penicillins, cephalosporins, erythromycin, and clindamycin [3] .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In humans, it can cause mild cutaneous (erysipeloid) or diffuse cutaneous infection in persons occupationally exposed to animals [2] . Rarely septic arthritis and other serious systemic complications like septicaemia and endocarditis can occur [3] . To our knowledge, all reported cases of septic arthritis caused by E. rhusiopathiae so far are in adults [4][5][6][7][8][9][10] .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is ubiquitous in nature, being found as a saphrophyte in most animals. Human E. rhusiopathiae infections can occur from contact with infected animals, their secretions or waste products, or organic matter contaminated by any of these (Reboli & Farrar, 1989;Brooke & Riley, 1999;Wang et al, 2010).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…E. rhusiopathiae causes infections primarily in animals; in humans it usually causes occupational diseases in people in contact with infected animals (Reboli & Farrar, 1989;Brooke & Riley, 1999;Wang et al, 2010). There are three well-defined clinical categories of the human disease: (i) a localized cutaneous form, erysipeloid, (ii) a generalized cutaneous form and (iii) an invasive septic form which is often associted with endocarditis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%