Diagnosis and treatment of botulism: A century later, clinical suspicion remains the cornerstone

Clinical Infectious Diseases

Volumn 48, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 1674-1675

  Sobel, Jeremy ^a,b  

^a CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION   (United States)

^b MS D 69 ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOASSAY; BOTULISM; CLINICAL FEATURE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; HUMAN; LABORATORY TEST; MOUSE BIOASSAY; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STANDARD; WOUND BOTULISM;

BIOLOGICAL ASSAY; BOTULISM; HUMANS;

EID: 66949166381     PISSN: 10584838     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/599030     Document Type: Note

References (9)

1. Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 US 184. 1964.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Botulism in the United States, 1899-1996: handbook for epidemiologists, clinicians, and laboratory workers. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1998.
3. Woodruff BA, Griffin PM, McCroskey LM, et al. Clinical and laboratory comparison of botulism from toxin types A, B, and E in the United States, 1975-1988. J Infect Dis 1992; 166:1281-6.
4. van Ermengem E. A new anaerobic bacillus and its relation to botulism [abbreviated translation of original]. Rev Infect Dis 1979; 1:701-19.
5. Dowell VR Jr, Hawkins TM. Laboratory methods in anaerobic bacteriology. In: CDC laboratory manual. DHEW publication (CDC) 87-8272. Atlanta, GA: US Dept of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, 1987.
6. Wheeler C, Inami G, Mohle-Boetani J, Vugia D. Sensitivity of the mouse bioassay in clinical wound botulism. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:1669-73 (in this issue).
7. Sobel J. Botulism. Clin Infect Dis 2005;41:1167-73.
8. Shapiro RL, Hatheway C, Swerdlow DL. Botulism in the United States: a clinical and epi- demiologic review. Ann Intern Med 1998; 129:221-8.
9. Black RE, Gunn RA. Hypersensitivity reactions associated with botulinal antitoxin. Am J Med 1980;69:567-70.