Kerry L LaPlante1, Michael J Rybak, Muhammad Amjad, Glenn W Kaatz. 1. Anti-Infective Research Laboratory, Department of Pharmacy Practice, Eugene Applebaum College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48201, USA.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To differentiate the characteristics of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and hospital-associated MRSA isolates on the basis of their susceptibility profiles, induction of clindamycin resistance, and staphylococcal chromosomal cassette (SCC) mec types. DESIGN: In vitro molecular and susceptibility study of isolates obtained from December 2004-January 2006 as part of a large, ongoing clinical study. SETTING: Level I trauma center in Detroit, Michigan. BACTERIAL STRAINS: Three hundred eight MRSA isolates randomly collected from patients; 130 were classified as community-associated, and 178 were classified hospital-associated by using definitions from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). INTERVENTION: Minimum inhibitory concentrations were tested on the basis of current guidelines from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All tested MRSA isolates were susceptible to daptomycin, linezolid, and vancomycin. In addition, community-associated MRSA isolates were significantly (all p < or = 0.05) more susceptible to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (99%), clindamycin (96%), and a fluoroquinolone (76%) than hospital-associated MRSA isolates. Inducible resistance to clindamycin was demonstrated in 8.4% of community-associated MRSA isolates versus 50% of hospital-associated MRSA isolates (p < or = 0.001). Of interest, 35% of the MRSA isolates collected from hospitalized patients (> 48 hrs after admission and according to the CDC definition) possessed SCCmec type IV. CONCLUSION: Overall, inducible clindamycin resistance occurred at significantly higher rates in the hospital-associated MRSA isolates, susceptibility differed significantly between community- and hospital-associated MRSA, and most of the hospital isolates contained SCCmec type IV.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To differentiate the characteristics of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and hospital-associated MRSA isolates on the basis of their susceptibility profiles, induction of clindamycin resistance, and staphylococcal chromosomal cassette (SCC) mec types. DESIGN: In vitro molecular and susceptibility study of isolates obtained from December 2004-January 2006 as part of a large, ongoing clinical study. SETTING: Level I trauma center in Detroit, Michigan. BACTERIAL STRAINS: Three hundred eight MRSA isolates randomly collected from patients; 130 were classified as community-associated, and 178 were classified hospital-associated by using definitions from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). INTERVENTION: Minimum inhibitory concentrations were tested on the basis of current guidelines from the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All tested MRSA isolates were susceptible to daptomycin, linezolid, and vancomycin. In addition, community-associated MRSA isolates were significantly (all p < or = 0.05) more susceptible to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (99%), clindamycin (96%), and a fluoroquinolone (76%) than hospital-associated MRSA isolates. Inducible resistance to clindamycin was demonstrated in 8.4% of community-associated MRSA isolates versus 50% of hospital-associated MRSA isolates (p < or = 0.001). Of interest, 35% of the MRSA isolates collected from hospitalized patients (> 48 hrs after admission and according to the CDC definition) possessed SCCmec type IV. CONCLUSION: Overall, inducible clindamycin resistance occurred at significantly higher rates in the hospital-associated MRSA isolates, susceptibility differed significantly between community- and hospital-associated MRSA, and most of the hospital isolates contained SCCmec type IV.
Authors: T Conceição; M Aires-de-Sousa; N Pona; M J Brito; C Barradas; R Coelho; T Sardinha; L Sancho; G de Sousa; M do Céu Machado; H de Lencastre Journal: Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2010-11-03 Impact factor: 3.267
Authors: Yi Guo; Romela Irene Ramos; John S Cho; Niles P Donegan; Ambrose L Cheung; Lloyd S Miller Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2012-12-03 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Keith A Rodvold; David P Nicolau; Thomas P Lodise; Mohammed Khashab; Gary J Noel; James B Kahn; Mark Gotfried; Sara A Murray; Susan Nicholson; Somvadee Laohavaleeson; Pamela R Tessier; G L Drusano Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2009-05-18 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Kerry L LaPlante; Steven N Leonard; David R Andes; William A Craig; Michael J Rybak Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2008-04-14 Impact factor: 5.191