Literature DB >> 20861339

Detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in specimens from various body sites: performance characteristics of the BD GeneOhm MRSA assay, the Xpert MRSA assay, and broth-enriched culture in an area with a low prevalence of MRSA infections.

Michael Hombach1, Gaby E Pfyffer, Malgorzata Roos, Katja Lucke.   

Abstract

Universal surveillance upon patient admission is important in reducing the transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and associated disease in hospitals. High costs for the health care system in conjunction with MRSA have promoted the development of rapid screening methods to detect MRSA carriers. This study compared two real-time PCR methods, the BD GeneOhm MRSA assay (BDGO) and the Xpert MRSA assay, with broth-enriched culture to define their performance characteristics and rapidity in an area with low MRSA prevalence. In total, 414 swabs from the nose and 389 swabs from the groin from 425 patients were tested. Of those 425 patients, 378 had swabs from both the nose and groin in parallel. Two hundred thirty-one and 194 patients were randomly assigned to the BDGO group and the Xpert MRSA group, respectively. In general, sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV) were high for the BDGO (100%, 98.5%, and 100%, respectively) and the Xpert MRSA (100%, 98.2%, and 100%, respectively), irrespective of whether or not nasal and inguinal specimens were considered alone or combined. In contrast, the positive predictive value (PPV) was lower: before the resolution of discrepant results, the PPVs for nasal and inguinal specimens alone and combined were 87.5%, 86.7%, and 82.4% for the BDGO and 91.7%, 66.7%, and 92.9% for the Xpert MRSA, respectively. After the resolution of discrepant results, PPVs were 93.8%, 93.3% and 94.1% for the BDGO and 91.7%, 88.9% and 92.9% for the Xpert MRSA, respectively. With the BDGO, 4 of 16 carriers were each identified by nasal or inguinal swabs alone, whereas in the Xpert MRSA group, 4 of 13 carriers were exclusively identified by nasal swabs and 2 of 13 were identified by inguinal swabs alone. Both PCR methods showed no significant difference in the number of discrepant results (odds ratio, 0.70 [P = 0.789]), but specimens from wounds and other body sites (axilla, vagina, and throat) produced discrepancies more often than nasal and groin specimens (odds ratios, 4.724 [P = 0.058] and 12.163 [P < 0.001], respectively). The facts that no false-negative PCR results were detected and increased PPVs were found after the resolution of discrepant results point to PCR as the actual gold standard. Since both sensitivity and NPV were exceptionally high for PCR, backup cultures may, therefore, be unnecessary in an area with low prevalence and with a preemptive isolation strategy but may still be useful for PCR-positive specimens because of the lower PPV for both methods and the possibility of susceptibility testing. The median time for analysis, including extraction, hands-on time, and actual PCR was 2 h 20 min for the Xpert MRSA versus 5 h 40 min for the BDGO. Concerning reporting time, including administration and specimen collection, the Xpert MRSA was faster than the BDGO (7 h 50 min versus 17 h).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20861339      PMCID: PMC3020866          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00670-10

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  35 in total

1.  Prevalence of oxacillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus among inpatients and outpatients in the United States during 2000.

Authors:  Mark E Jones; David C Mayfield; Clyde Thornsberry; James A Karlowsky; Daniel F Sahm; Dan Peterson
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus directly from nasal swab specimens by a real-time PCR assay.

Authors:  David K Warren; Robert S Liao; Liana R Merz; Michael Eveland; W Michael Dunne
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Risk of transmission of nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from patients colonized with MRSA.

Authors:  Christine Geffers; Barry M Farr
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.254

Review 4.  Community-acquired meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: an emerging threat.

Authors:  Nicola Zetola; John S Francis; Eric L Nuermberger; William R Bishai
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 25.071

5.  Controlling methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: quantifying the effects of interventions and rapid diagnostic testing.

Authors:  M C J Bootsma; O Diekmann; M J M Bonten
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-03-24       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Evaluating the probability of previously unknown carriage of MRSA at hospital admission.

Authors:  Stephan Harbarth; Hugo Sax; Carolina Fankhauser-Rodriguez; Jacques Schrenzel; Americo Agostinho; Didier Pittet
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 4.965

7.  Modeling transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among patients admitted to a hospital.

Authors:  Janet Raboud; Refik Saskin; Andrew Simor; Mark Loeb; Karen Green; Don E Low; Allison McGeer
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.254

8.  Evaluation of the IDI-MRSA assay for detection of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus from nasal and rectal specimens pooled in a selective broth.

Authors:  M Desjardins; Christiane Guibord; B Lalonde; B Toye; K Ramotar
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Comparison of mortality associated with methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sara E Cosgrove; George Sakoulas; Eli N Perencevich; Mitchell J Schwaber; Adolf W Karchmer; Yehuda Carmeli
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2002-12-13       Impact factor: 9.079

10.  Evaluation of a strategy of screening multiple anatomical sites for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus at admission to a teaching hospital.

Authors:  Matthieu Eveillard; Arnaud de Lassence; Evelyne Lancien; Guilène Barnaud; Jean-Damien Ricard; Marie-Laure Joly-Guillou
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2006-02-08       Impact factor: 3.254

View more
  24 in total

Review 1.  Transmission rates, screening methods and costs of MRSA--a systematic literature review related to the prevalence in Germany.

Authors:  A Tübbicke; C Hübner; A Kramer; N-O Hübner; S Fleßa
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2012-05-10       Impact factor: 3.267

2.  Predictive value of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal swab PCR assay for MRSA pneumonia.

Authors:  Benjamin Dangerfield; Andrew Chung; Brandon Webb; Maria Teresa Seville
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 3.  Are we ready for novel detection methods to treat respiratory pathogens in hospital-acquired pneumonia?

Authors:  Andrea Endimiani; Kristine M Hujer; Andrea M Hujer; Sebastian Kurz; Michael R Jacobs; David S Perlin; Robert A Bonomo
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Comparative Evaluation of Two PCR-Based Methods for Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): Xpert MRSA Gen 3 and BD-Max MRSA XT.

Authors:  Margaux Lepainteur; Sandrine Delattre; Sophie Cozza; Christine Lawrence; Anne-Laure Roux; Martin Rottman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2015-04-15       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  MRSA screening by the Xpert MRSA PCR assay: pooling samples of the nose, throat, and groin increases the sensitivity of detection without increasing the laboratory costs.

Authors:  D S Blanc; I Nahimana; G Zanetti; G Greub
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2012-11-10       Impact factor: 3.267

6.  Analysis of Staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec in BD GeneOhm MRSA assay-negative strains.

Authors:  Meng Zhang; Teruyo Ito; Shanshuang Li; Shigeki Misawa; Shigemi Kondo; Takashi Miida; Akimichi Ohsaka; Keiichi Hiramatsu
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 5.191

7.  Comparison of the BD Max methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) assay and the BD GeneOhm MRSA achromopeptidase assay with direct- and enriched-culture techniques using clinical specimens for detection of MRSA.

Authors:  Alexander H Dalpke; Marjeta Hofko; Stefan Zimmermann
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2012-07-18       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Laboratory evaluation of the BD MAX MRSA assay.

Authors:  Raymond Widen; Vicki Healer; Suzane Silbert
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Comparison of ESwab with traditional swabs for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using two different walk-away commercial real-time PCR methods.

Authors:  Suzane Silbert; Carly Kubasek; Dominic Uy; Raymond Widen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-04-23       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Accurate Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Mixtures by Use of Single-Bacterium Duplex Droplet Digital PCR.

Authors:  Jun Luo; Junhua Li; Hang Yang; Junping Yu; Hongping Wei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 5.948

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.