OBJECTIVE: Not much is known about the zoonotic transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in companion animals in the United States. We report the rate of prevalence of S. aureus and MRSA recovered from clinical samples of animals requiring treatment at veterinary clinics throughout the upper midwestern and northeastern United States. DESIGN: We compared phenotypes, genotypes, and virulence profiles of the MRSA isolates identified in companion animals, such as cats, dogs, horses, and pigs, with typical human nosocomial and community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA) genotypes to assess implied zoonotic transmission or zooanthroponosis. Five hundred thirty-three coagulase-positive staphylococci (CPS) isolates recovered between 2006 and 2008 from a variety of animal-source samples were screened for S. aureus by S. aureus-specific 16S rDNA primers and were screened for methicillin-resistance. All MRSA isolates were genotyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus sequence typing (MLST), and spa typing. They were also screened for common staphylococcal enterotoxin and adhesion genes by multiplex and singleplex PCR. RESULTS: Among the 533 CPS isolates recovered, 66 (12.4%) were determined to be S. aureus and 24 (4.5%) were MRSA. The percent of animals that were positive for S. aureus were as follows: 6.6% (32 of 487) dogs, 39.6% (19 of 48) cats, 83.3% (10 of 12) horses, and 100% of pigs, rabbits, hamsters and rats. Notably, 36.4% of all S. aureus identified were MRSA. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus was present in clinical samples from 12 of 487 dogs (2.5%), 6 of 48 cats (12.5%), 5 of 12 horses (42%), and 1 of 2 pigs (50%). The 24 MRSA isolates resolved into 4 PFGE clones: USA100 (50%), USA300 (16.7%), USA500 (20.8%) and USA800 (12.5%) and 6 sequence types (ST5, ST8, ST105, ST830, and ST986) or 2 clonal complexes, CC5 and CC8. Five major virulence profiles (clusters A to E) were observed in these MRSA isolates. Genotypic and virulence profiles of cats and dogs were more similar to each other than to those of horses. A Panton-Valentine leukocidin positive isolate with ST8:USA300 background was identified in a pig causing skin and soft infection. CONCLUSION: The presence of human MRSA clones in these animals suggests possible reverse zoonotic transmission. This study reports the first case of a USA300 genotype in a pig. Presence of multiple virulence profiles within a MRSA genotype in these animals suggests the potential of emergence of new MRSA clones by gaining or losing additional virulence genes.
OBJECTIVE: Not much is known about the zoonotic transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in companion animals in the United States. We report the rate of prevalence of S. aureus and MRSA recovered from clinical samples of animals requiring treatment at veterinary clinics throughout the upper midwestern and northeastern United States. DESIGN: We compared phenotypes, genotypes, and virulence profiles of the MRSA isolates identified in companion animals, such as cats, dogs, horses, and pigs, with typical human nosocomial and community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA) genotypes to assess implied zoonotic transmission or zooanthroponosis. Five hundred thirty-three coagulase-positive staphylococci (CPS) isolates recovered between 2006 and 2008 from a variety of animal-source samples were screened for S. aureus by S. aureus-specific 16S rDNA primers and were screened for methicillin-resistance. All MRSA isolates were genotyped by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus sequence typing (MLST), and spa typing. They were also screened for common staphylococcal enterotoxin and adhesion genes by multiplex and singleplex PCR. RESULTS: Among the 533 CPS isolates recovered, 66 (12.4%) were determined to be S. aureus and 24 (4.5%) were MRSA. The percent of animals that were positive for S. aureus were as follows: 6.6% (32 of 487) dogs, 39.6% (19 of 48) cats, 83.3% (10 of 12) horses, and 100% of pigs, rabbits, hamsters and rats. Notably, 36.4% of all S. aureus identified were MRSA. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus was present in clinical samples from 12 of 487 dogs (2.5%), 6 of 48 cats (12.5%), 5 of 12 horses (42%), and 1 of 2 pigs (50%). The 24 MRSA isolates resolved into 4 PFGE clones: USA100 (50%), USA300 (16.7%), USA500 (20.8%) and USA800 (12.5%) and 6 sequence types (ST5, ST8, ST105, ST830, and ST986) or 2 clonal complexes, CC5 and CC8. Five major virulence profiles (clusters A to E) were observed in these MRSA isolates. Genotypic and virulence profiles of cats and dogs were more similar to each other than to those of horses. A Panton-Valentine leukocidin positive isolate with ST8:USA300 background was identified in a pig causing skin and soft infection. CONCLUSION: The presence of human MRSA clones in these animals suggests possible reverse zoonotic transmission. This study reports the first case of a USA300 genotype in a pig. Presence of multiple virulence profiles within a MRSA genotype in these animals suggests the potential of emergence of new MRSA clones by gaining or losing additional virulence genes.
Authors: M W H Wulf; M Sørum; A van Nes; R Skov; W J G Melchers; C H W Klaassen; A Voss Journal: Clin Microbiol Infect Date: 2007-11-06 Impact factor: 8.067
Authors: Birgit Walther; Lothar H Wieler; Alexander W Friedrich; Anne-Merethe Hanssen; Barbara Kohn; Leo Brunnberg; Antina Lübke-Becker Journal: Vet Microbiol Date: 2007-07-25 Impact factor: 3.293
Authors: Jennifer M Brady; Mary E Stemper; Ashley Weigel; Po-Huang Chyou; Kurt D Reed; Sanjay K Shukla Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2007-06-13 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Jill L Abraham; Daniel O Morris; Gregory C Griffeth; Frances S Shofer; Shelley C Rankin Journal: Vet Dermatol Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 1.589
Authors: R Monina Klevens; Melissa A Morrison; Scott K Fridkin; Arthur Reingold; Susan Petit; Ken Gershman; Susan Ray; Lee H Harrison; Ruth Lynfield; Ghinwa Dumyati; John M Townes; Allen S Craig; Gregory Fosheim; Linda K McDougal; Fred C Tenover Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Beth A Hanselman; Steve A Kruth; Joyce Rousseau; Donald E Low; Barbara M Willey; Allison McGeer; J Scott Weese Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Alexander Mellmann; Thomas Weniger; Christoph Berssenbrügge; Jörg Rothgänger; Michael Sammeth; Jens Stoye; Dag Harmsen Journal: BMC Microbiol Date: 2007-10-29 Impact factor: 3.605
Authors: Shylo E Wardyn; Brett M Forshey; Sarah A Farina; Ashley E Kates; Rajeshwari Nair; Megan K Quick; James Y Wu; Blake M Hanson; Sean M O'Malley; Hannah W Shows; Ellen M Heywood; Laura E Beane-Freeman; Charles F Lynch; Margaret Carrel; Tara C Smith Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2015-04-29 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: James Q Del Rosso; Ted Rosen; Diane Thiboutot; Guy F Webster; Richard L Gallo; James J Leyden; Clay Walker; George Zhanel; Lawrence Eichenfield Journal: J Clin Aesthet Dermatol Date: 2016-06-01
Authors: Lu Zhang; Daniel Kinkelaar; Ying Huang; Yingli Li; Xiaojing Li; Hua H Wang Journal: Appl Environ Microbiol Date: 2011-08-05 Impact factor: 4.792
Authors: Jorge Pinto Ferreira; Vance G Fowler; Maria T Correa; Roberta Lyman; Felicia Ruffin; Kevin L Anderson Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2011-02-16 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Emily Levin-Edens; Olusegun O Soge; David No; Amy Stiffarm; J Scott Meschke; Marilyn C Roberts Journal: FEMS Microbiol Ecol Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 4.194
Authors: Arshnee Moodley; Carmen Espinosa-Gongora; Søren S Nielsen; Alex J McCarthy; Jodi A Lindsay; Luca Guardabassi Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-14 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Florence Crombé; Wannes Vanderhaeghen; Corné P de Vogel; Willem J Van Wamel; Kurt Barbé; Katleen Hermans; Freddy Haesebrouck; Patrick Butaye Journal: Vet Res Date: 2013-01-22 Impact factor: 3.683
Authors: Meghan F Davis; Amy E Peterson; Kathleen G Julian; Wallace H Greene; Lance B Price; Kenrad Nelson; Cynthia J Whitener; Ellen K Silbergeld Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-01-24 Impact factor: 3.240