Molecular epidemiology of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolated from the eye.
Molecular epidemiology of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolated from the eye.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3109/02713683.2010.534229
复制
发表时间：
2011-02
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
Morris TW
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hesje CK;Sanfilippo CM;Haas W;Morris TW
耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌（MRSA）菌株通常分为医院获得性（HA）和社区获得性（CA）。典型的HA-MRSA分离株具有多药耐药和SCCmec II型盒的特征，而CA-MRSA分离株通常对更多药物类别敏感，通常为SCCmec IV型，并且经常携带pton - valentine leukocidin （PVL）基因。本研究确定了眼部MRSA分离株中CA和HA菌株特征的存在。本文对56株眼部分离株进行了鉴定，其中包括40株MRSA和16株甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌（MSSA）比较菌株。最低抑制浓度（MIC）测试是根据目前临床和实验室标准协会的指导方针进行的。采用聚合酶链反应（PCR）检测PVL编码基因，确定SCCmec型，DNA测序后进行spa分型和聚类分析。38株可分型MRSA分离株中，22株为SCCmec II型，16株为SCCmec IV型。SCCmec II型分离株均为多药耐药，缺乏PVL基因，为spa型t002或密切相关的spa型。相比之下，SCCmec IV型菌株对较少种类的抗菌药物耐药，通常具有PVL基因（75.0%），为spa型t008或密切相关的spa型。虽然本研究中大多数眼部MRSA菌株符合ha和CA-MRSA的经典特征，但一些CA-MRSA菌株表现出更高水平的抗菌素耐药性，这应该引起眼科护理专业人员的特别关注。此外，本研究观察到的spa类型与SCCmec类型的明显关联值得进一步研究，并表明spa分型可能在未来的HA-和CA-MRSA表征研究中有用。
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains are commonly classified as hospital-acquired (HA) or community-acquired (CA). Typical HA-MRSA isolates are characterized by multidrug resistance and the SCCmec type II cassette, while CA-MRSA isolates are generally susceptible to more drug classes, are often of SCCmec type IV, and frequently carry the Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) genes. This study determined the presence of traits characteristic for CA and HA strains in ocular MRSA isolates. Fifty-six recent ocular isolates, consisting of 40 MRSA and 16 methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) comparator strains, were characterized. Minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) testing was done according to current Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines. Detection of the PVL encoding genes and determination of the SCCmec type was done by polymerase chain reaction (PCR), while spa typing and cluster analysis was performed following DNA sequencing. Of the 38 typeable MRSA isolates, 22 were of SCCmec type II and 16 were of SCCmec type IV. All SCCmec type II isolates were multidrug-resistant, lacked the PVL genes, and were of spa type t002 or closely related spa types. In contrast, the SCCmec type IV isolates were resistant to fewer classes of antimicrobial agents, often possessed the PVL genes (75.0%), and were of spa type t008 or closely related spa types. While the majority of ocular MRSA strains in this study fit the classical profile of HA-and CA-MRSA, some CA-MRSA isolates exhibited higher levels of antimicrobial resistance, which should be of particular concern to eye-care professionals. Furthermore, the apparent association of spa types and SCCmec types observed here warrants further investigation and suggests that spa typing may be useful in future HA- and CA-MRSA characterization studies.