Comparison of polymerase chain reaction and conventional methods in detecting methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Adaleti R., Nakipoglu Y., Karahan Z. C., Tasdemir C., Kaya F.

JOURNAL OF INFECTION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, cilt.2, sa.1, ss.46-50, 2008 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 2 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2008
  • Dergi Adı: JOURNAL OF INFECTION IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.46-50
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), polymerase chain reaction (PCR), oxacillin disk diffusion, cefoxitin disk diffusion, oxacillin agar screening, DISK DIFFUSION METHOD, SCREENING AGAR BASE, 30 MU-G, OXACILLIN RESISTANCE, MRSA-SCREEN, CEFOXITIN, TESTS
  • İstanbul Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: Accurate and rapid detection of methicillin-resistant

 

Staphylococcus aureus is very important in a clinical laboratory

setting to avoid treatment failure. Conventional methods were compared against the gold standard polymerase chain reaction

(PCR) technique to determine the best combination of the routine procedures.

Methodology: Methicillin resistance was investigated in 416 clinical

 

Staphylococcus aureus isolates by PCR, oxacillin agar

screening (OAS), oxacillin disk diffusion (ODD) and cefoxitin disk diffusion (CDD) methods.

Results: Two hundred and ten (51%) out of 416

 

S. aureus strains were found to be mecA-positive by PCR. Sensitivity and

specificity of the ODD, CDD and OAS methods were detected as follows: 100% and 89%, 99.50% and 100%, and 99.50% and

100%, respectively

 

.

Conclusion: Combining the ODD and CDD methods could be a good choice for detecting methicillin resistance in

 

S. aureus

strains where mecA PCR cannot be performed.

Key Words

: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), polymerase chain reaction (PCR), oxacillin disk diffusion,

cefoxitin disk diffusion, oxacillin agar screening.

1. Boutiba-Ben Boubaker I et al. (2004) Evaluation of a cefoxitin disk diffusion test for the routine detection of

methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Microbiol Infect 10: 762–765.

2. Diederen B, Duijn IV, Belkum AV, Willemse P, Keulen PV, Kluytmans J (2005) Performance of CHROMagar

MRSA Medium for Detection of Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureus, J Clin Microbiol 43: 1925–

1927.

3. Cavassini M, Wenger A, Jaton K, Blanc DS, Bille J (1999)Evaluation of MRSA screen, a simple anti-PBP-2a slide latex agglutination kit, for rapid detection of methicillin resistance in

Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol 37:1591–1594.

4. Gerberding JL, Miick C, Liu HH, Chambers HF (1991) Comparison of conventional susceptibility tests with direct

detection of penicillin binding protein 2a in borderline oxacillin-resistant strains of Staphylococcus aureus.

Antimicrob Agents Chemother 35: 2574–2579.

5. Thean YT (2002) A comparison of PCR detection of mecA with two standard methods of oxacillin disk

susceptibility testing for coagulase negative staphylococci. J Med Microbiol 51: 83–85.

6. Tokue Y, Shoji S, Satoh K, Watanabe A, Motomiya M (1992) Comparison of a polymerase chain reaction assay

and a conventional microbiologic method for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob

Agents Chemother 36: 6–9.

7. Mougeot C, Guillaumat-Tailliet J, Libert JM (2005) Staphylococcus aureus : new detection of intrinsic

resistance using the diffusion method.Pathol Biol (Paris)49: 199–204.

8. Felten A, Grandry B, Lagrange PH et al. (2002)Evaluation of three techniques for detection of low-level

methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): adisc diffusion method with cefoxitin and moxalactam, the

Vitek 2 system, and the MRSA-screen latex agglutinationtest. J Clin Microbiol 40: 2766–71.

9. Skov R, Smyth R, Clausen M et al. (2003) Evaluation of acefoxitin 30 m g disc on Iso Sensitest agar for detection

of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. JAntimicrob Chemother 52: 204–207.

10. Cauwelier B et al. (2004) Evaluation of a disk diffusionmethod with cefoxitin (30 m g) for detection of methicillinresistantStaphylococcus aureus . Eur J Clin MicrobiolInfect Dis 23: 389–392.

11. Ida T, Okamoto R, Shimauchi C, Okubo T, Kuga A, InoueM (2001) Identification of aminoglycoside-modifying

enzymes by susceptibility testing: Epidemiology ofmethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Japan. J

Clin Microbiol 39: 3115-3121.

12. Araj GF, Talhouk RS, Siman CJ, Maasad MJ (1999)Discrepancies between mecA PZR and conventional

tests used for detection of methicillin resistantStaphylococcus aureus. Int J Antimicrob Agents 11: 47-

52.

13. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performancestandards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 15th

informational supplement.CLSI/NCCLS. 2005; M100-S15.Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, Pa.

14. Simor A E, Goodfellow J, Louie L, Louie M (2001)Evaluation of new medium, oxacillin resistance screening

agar base, for the detection of methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus from clinical specimens. J Clin

Microbiol. 39: 3422.

15. Becker A, Forster DH, Kniehl E (2002) Oxacillin resistance screening agar base for detection of

methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol 40: 4400-4401.

16. Krishnan PU, Miles K, Shetty N (2002) Detection of methicillin and mupirocin resistance in Staphylococcus

aureus isolates using conventional and molecularmethods: a descriptive study from a burns unit with high

prevalence of MRSA. J Clin Pathol. 55: 745-748.

17. Smyth RW and Kahlmeter G (2005) Mannitol Salt Agar-Cefoxitin Combination as a Screening Medium for

Methicillin-Resistant staphylococcus aureus. J ClinMicrobiol 43: 3797–3799.

18. Velasco D, Mar Tomas MD, Cartelle M, Beceiro A, PerezA, Molina F, Moure R, Villanueva R, Bou G (2005)

Evaluation of different methods for detecting methicillin(oxacillin) resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Journal

of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 55: 379–382.