Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Presumptive Identification
Given a specific site and the pres-
ence of a characteristic organism, an
educated guess can be made about its
identity. Presumptive identification is
not necessary or even expected in a re-
port of a Gram stain. However, as part
of self-imposed quality assurance, it is
wise to consider presumptive identifica-
tion when interpreting a Gram stain. [I1g] Clue cell: Squamous epithelial cell with borders (arrows) obscured by gram-negative
While examining a smear from a spe- coccobacilli, most likely Gardnerella species (×40). Note the predominance of gram-negative
bacteria and the absence of both inflammatory cells and the morphotypes of normal flora, eg,
cific site, the laboratorian should ask: gram-positive bacilli.
“Is what I am seeing expected? Are
these gram-negative coccobacilli sug-
gestive of H influenzae [T1] [I1f] ex- wound. (In fact, wounds can be caused higher. Similarly, the presence of gram-
pected from a wound?” According to by other less common bacteria not cov- negative diplococci in a CSF specimen
[T1] and [T2], this is an unexpected ered in this article). suggests Neisseria meningitidis, not N 373
finding. In that case, reexamining the As another example, a sputum gonorrhoeae or M catarrhalis, all of
smear to verify the presence of gram- specimen with many lancet-shaped which may look identical to each other
negative coccobacilli or consultation gram-positive diplococci with a on Gram stain [T1] [I1e]. Neisseria
with another technologist would surrounding capsule will most likely gonorrhoeae would be expected in gen-
improve confidence in the report and its grow S pneumoniae [T1] [I1c]. Finding ital secretions (or even a joint fluid),
quality, even if gram-negative many neutrophils associated with these and M catarrhalis would be expected in
coccobacilli are indeed present in the bacteria makes the likelihood even respiratory secretions [T1] [T2].
underdecolorization has occurred. Al- management. In: Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda 12. Cookson BT, Orkand AM, Curtis J, et al. Gram-
WM, et al, eds. Diagnostic Microbiology. 5th ed. Stain Tutor [CD-ROM, version 2.0]. Seattle, WA:
though these guidelines give objective New York, NY: Lippincott; 1997:83. University of Washington; 1999.
criteria for interpreting the most com-
5. Neisseria species and Moraxella catarrhalis. In
monly encountered Gram stains, there Koneman EW, Allen SD, Janda WM, et al, eds.
will be exceptions. The quality of the Diagnostic Microbiology. 5th ed. New York, NY:
reports and confidence in the reports Lippincott; 1997:519. Suggested Reading
will improve if consultation with an- 6. Neisseria and Moraxella catarrhalis. In: Forbes McClelland R. Gram’s stain: the key to
other technologist occurs before report- BD, Sahm D, Weissfeld A. Bailey and Scott’s microbiology. Med Lab Observer.
ing such findings. Diagnostic Microbiology. 10th ed. St Louis, MO: 2001;33:20-28.
Mosby; 1998:599.
7. Knapp JS, Totten PA, Mulks MH, et al.
Acknowledgment
Characterization of Neisseria cinerea, a
This article was part of a project nonpathogenic species isolated on Morton-Lewis
supported by the Memorial Medical medium selected for pathogenic Neisseria spp. J
InterNetConnect
Foundation, Springfield, IL. Clin Microbiol. 1984;19:63-67. Loyola University Medical Center’s Gram
8. Dossett JH, Appelbaum PC, Knapp JS, et al. stain page:
1. Wilson ML. Clinically relevant, cost effective Proctitis associated with Neisseria cinerea <www.lumen.luc.edu/lumen/DeptWebs/micr
clinical microbiology. Am J Clin Pathol. misidentified as Neisseria gonorrhoeae in a child. obio/med/gram/gram-stn.htm>
1997;107:154-167. J Clin Microbiol. 1985;21:575-577.
375