Literature DB >> 10075277

Discrepancies between mecA PCR and conventional tests used for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

G F Araj1, R S Talhouk, C J Simaan, M J Maasad.   

Abstract

Conventional and molecular techniques are being used in the detection of methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus but they do not always show concordant results. In this study, a mecA PCR-based amplification was compared with the 1 microg oxacillin disk diffusion test and the Epsilometer test (E-test) for detection of MICs. Among 31 isolates initially characterized as MRSA by the disk diffusion test, mecA was detected in only 13 (42%) isolates. The E-test showed a wide range of oxacillin MICs (0.5 - > 256 microg/ml) among these 31 MRSA isolates: seven isolates had an MIC of > 256 microg/ml, one had 64 microg/ml, two had 4 microg/ml, two had 3 microg/ml, one had 2.5 microg/ml, nine had 2 microg/ml, three had 1.5 microg/ml, five had 1 microg/ml and one had 0.5 microg/ml. Comparing the mecA PCR results with the E-test oxacillin MIC findings revealed that mecA was detected in seven of eight isolates (87.5%) with an MIC of > or = 64 microg/ml, in three of 14 isolates (21.4%) with an MIC of 2-4 microg/ml and in three of nine isolates (33.3%) with an MIC of < 2 microg/ml. Beta-lactamase production was positive in 28/31 isolates (90.3%). Because of this variation between tests and since several resistance mechanisms are known to mediate methicillin resistance in S. aureus, the reliable detection of MRSA cannot be solely based on detection of mecA gene in S. aureus. At this stage and until new guidelines are introduced by an official body, such as NCCLS, a combination of conventional methods alone or together with a molecular method should be used every time S. aureus is tested for detection of methicillin resistance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10075277     DOI: 10.1016/s0924-8579(98)00047-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents        ISSN: 0924-8579            Impact factor:   5.283


  8 in total

1.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: comparison of susceptibility testing methods and analysis of mecA-positive susceptible strains.

Authors:  G Sakoulas; H S Gold; L Venkataraman; P C DeGirolami; G M Eliopoulos; Q Qian
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Rapid extraction from and direct identification in clinical samples of methicillin-resistant staphylococci using the PCR.

Authors:  R I Jaffe; J D Lane; S V Albury; D M Niemeyer
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Comparison of mecA polymerase chain reaction with phenotypic methods for the detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  M M Baddour; M M AbuElKheir; A J Fatani
Journal:  Curr Microbiol       Date:  2007-10-09       Impact factor: 2.188

4.  Laboratory maintenance of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

Authors:  Nicholas P Vitko; Anthony R Richardson
Journal:  Curr Protoc Microbiol       Date:  2013-02

5.  Methicillin resistant and susceptible Staphylococcus aureus: Appraising therapeutic approaches in the Northwest of Iran.

Authors:  Alka Hasani; Vajihe Sheikhalizadeh; Akbar Hasani; Behrouz Naghili; Vahide Valizadeh; Ali Reza Nikoonijad
Journal:  Iran J Microbiol       Date:  2013-03

6.  Occurrence, distribution and pattern analysis of methicillin resistant (MRSA) and methicillin sensitive (MSSA) Staphylococcus aureus on fomites in public facilities.

Authors:  Ziad W Jaradat; Maysoon Khwaileh; Waseem Al Mousa; Qutaiba O Ababneh; Anas Al Nabulsi
Journal:  Pathog Glob Health       Date:  2021-08-02       Impact factor: 3.735

7.  Detection of methicillin resistance and slime factor production of Staphylococcus aureus in bovine mastitis.

Authors:  Alper Ciftci; Arzu Findik; Ertan Emek Onuk; Serap Savasan
Journal:  Braz J Microbiol       Date:  2009-06-01       Impact factor: 2.476

8.  Antibiotic susceptibility and genomic variations in Staphylococcus aureus associated with Skin and Soft Tissue Infection (SSTI) disease groups.

Authors:  Chih-Hsuan Changchien; Shu-Wun Chen; Ying-Ying Chen; Chishih Chu
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2016-06-10       Impact factor: 3.090

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.