The emergence of S. aureus with intermediate resistance to glycopeptides emphasizes the importance of the prudent use of antibiotics, the laboratory capacity to identify resistant strains, and the use of infection-control precautions to prevent transmission.

The critical role of the microbiology laboratory in infectious disease diagnosis calls for a close, positive working relationship between the physician and the microbiologists who provide enormous value to the health care team. This document, developed by both laboratory and clinical experts, provides information on which tests are valuable and in which contexts, and on tests that add little or no value for diagnostic decisions. Sections are divided into anatomic systems, including Bloodstream Infections and Infections of the Cardiovascular System, Central Nervous System Infections, Ocular Infections, Soft Tissue Infections of the Head and Neck, Upper Respiratory Infections, Lower Respiratory Tract infections, Infections of the Gastrointestinal Tract, Intraabdominal Infections, Bone and Joint Infections, Urinary Tract Infections, Genital Infections, and Skin and Soft Tissue Infections; or into etiologic agent groups, including Tickborne Infections, Viral Syndromes, and Blood and Tissue Parasite Infections. Each section contains introductory concepts, a summary of key points, and detailed tables that list suspected agents; the most reliable tests to order; the samples (and volumes) to collect in order of preference; specimen transport devices, procedures, times, and temperatures; and detailed notes on specific issues regarding the test methods, such as when tests are likely to require a specialized laboratory or have prolonged turnaround times. There is redundancy among the tables and sections, as many agents and assay choices overlap. The document is intended to serve as a reference to guide physicians in choosing tests that will aid them to diagnose infectious diseases in their patients.

The critical nature of the microbiology laboratory in infectious disease diagnosis calls for a close, positive working relationship between the physician/advanced practice provider and the microbiologists who provide enormous value to the healthcare team. This document, developed by experts in laboratory and adult and pediatric clinical medicine, provides information on which tests are valuable and in which contexts, and on tests that add little or no value for diagnostic decisions. This document presents a system-based approach rather than specimen-based approach, and includes bloodstream and cardiovascular system infections, central nervous system infections, ocular infections, soft tissue infections of the head and neck, upper and lower respiratory infections, infections of the gastrointestinal tract, intra-abdominal infections, bone and joint infections, urinary tract infections, genital infections, and other skin and soft tissue infections; or into etiologic agent groups, including arthropod-borne infections, viral syndromes, and blood and tissue parasite infections. Each section contains introductory concepts, a summary of key points, and detailed tables that list suspected agents; the most reliable tests to order; the samples (and volumes) to collect in order of preference; specimen transport devices, procedures, times, and temperatures; and detailed notes on specific issues regarding the test methods, such as when tests are likely to require a specialized laboratory or have prolonged turnaround times. In addition, the pediatric needs of specimen management are also emphasized. There is intentional redundancy among the tables and sections, as many agents and assay choices overlap. The document is intended to serve as a guidance for physicians in choosing tests that will aid them to quickly and accurately diagnose infectious diseases in their patients.

The critical nature of the microbiology laboratory in infectious disease diagnosis calls for a close, positive working relationship between the physician/advanced practice provider and the microbiologists who provide enormous value to the healthcare team. This document, developed by experts in laboratory and adult and pediatric clinical medicine, provides information on which tests are valuable and in which contexts, and on tests that add little or no value for diagnostic decisions. This document presents a system-based approach rather than specimen-based approach, and includes bloodstream and cardiovascular system infections, central nervous system infections, ocular infections, soft tissue infections of the head and neck, upper and lower respiratory infections, infections of the gastrointestinal tract, intra-abdominal infections, bone and joint infections, urinary tract infections, genital infections, and other skin and soft tissue infections; or into etiologic agent groups, including arthropod-borne infections, viral syndromes, and blood and tissue parasite infections. Each section contains introductory concepts, a summary of key points, and detailed tables that list suspected agents; the most reliable tests to order; the samples (and volumes) to collect in order of preference; specimen transport devices, procedures, times, and temperatures; and detailed notes on specific issues regarding the test methods, such as when tests are likely to require a specialized laboratory or have prolonged turnaround times. In addition, the pediatric needs of specimen management are also emphasized. There is intentional redundancy among the tables and sections, as many agents and assay choices overlap. The document is intended to serve as a guidance for physicians in choosing tests that will aid them to quickly and accurately diagnose infectious diseases in their patients.

Over a 2-year period (2003 to 2005) patients with community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) and community-acquired methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MSSA) infections were prospectively identified. Patients infected with CA-MRSA (n ‫؍‬ 102 patients) and CA-MSSA (n ‫؍‬ 102 patients) had median ages of 46 and 53 years, respectively; the most common sites of infection in the two groups were skin/soft tissue (80 and 93%, respectively), respiratory tract (13 and 6%, respectively), and blood (4 and 1%, respectively). Fourteen percent of patients with CA-MRSA infections and 3% of patients with CA-MSSA infections had household contacts with similar infections (P < 0.01). Among the CA-MRSA isolates, the pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) groups detected were USA300 (49%) and USA100 (13%), with 27 PFGE groups overall; 71% of the isolates were staphylococcal chromosome cassette mec (SCCmec) type IV, 29% were SCCmec type II, and 54% had the Panton-Valentine leucocidin (PVL) gene. Among the CA-MSSA isolates there were 33 PFGE groups, with isolates of the USA200 group comprising 11%, isolates of the USA600 group comprising 11%, isolates of the USA100 group comprising 10%, and isolates of the PVL type comprising 10%. Forty-six and 18% of the patients infected with CA-MRSA and CA-MSSA, respectively, were hospitalized (P < 0.001). Fifty percent of the patients received antibiotic therapy alone, 5% received surgery alone, 30% received antibiotics and surgery, 3% received other therapy, and 12% received no treatment. The median durations of antibiotic therapy were 12 and 10 days in the CA-MRSA-and CA-MSSA-infected patients, respectively; 48 and 56% of the patients in the two groups received adequate antimicrobial therapy, respectively (P < 0.001). The clinical success rates of the initial therapy in the two groups were 61 and 84%, respectively (P < 0.001); recurrences were more common in the CA-MRSA group (recurrences were detected in 18 and 6% of the patients in the two groups, respectively [P < 0.001]). CA-MRSA was an independent predictor of clinical failure in multivariate analysis (odds ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.7 to 6.9). In the community setting, the molecular characteristics of the S. aureus strains were heterogeneous. CA-MRSA infections were associated with a more adverse impact on outcome than CA-MSSA infections.

Of the 9 vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA) cases reported to date in the literature, 7 occurred in Michigan. In 5 of the 7 Michigan VRSA cases, an Inc18-like vanA plasmid was identified in the VRSA isolate and/or an associated vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) isolate from the same patient. This plasmid may play a critical role in the emergence of VRSA. We studied the geographical distribution of the plasmid by testing 1,641 VRE isolates from three separate collections by PCR for plasmid-specific genes traA, repR, and vanA. Isolates from one collection (phase 2) were recovered from surveillance cultures collected in 17 hospitals in 13 states. All VRE isolates from 2 Michigan institutions (n ‫؍‬ 386) and between 60 and 70 VRE isolates (n ‫؍‬ 883) from the other hospitals were tested. Fifteen VRE isolates (3.9%) from Michigan were positive for an Inc18-like vanA plasmid (9 E. faecalis [12.5%], 3 E. faecium [1.0%], 2 E. avium, and 1 E. raffinosus). Six VRE isolates (0.6%) from outside Michigan were positive (3 E. faecalis [2.7%] and 3 E. faecium [0.4%]). Of all E. faecalis isolates tested, 6.0% were positive for the plasmid, compared to 0.6% for E. faecium and 3.0% for other spp. Fourteen of the 15 plasmid-positive isolates from Michigan had the same Tn1546 insertion site location as the VRSA-associated Inc18-like plasmid, whereas 5 of 6 plasmid-positive isolates from outside Michigan differed in this characteristic. Most plasmid-positive E. faecalis isolates demonstrated diverse patterns by PFGE, with the exception of three pairs with indistinguishable patterns, suggesting that the plasmid is mobile in nature. Although VRE isolates with the VRSA-associated Inc18-like vanA plasmid were more common in Michigan, they remain rare. Periodic surveillance of VRE isolates for the plasmid may be useful in predicting the occurrence of VRSA.

Reproducibility of ethambutol (EMB) susceptibility test results forMycobacterium tuberculosis has always been difficult for a variety of reasons, including the narrow range between the critical breakpoint for EMB resistance and the MIC for susceptible strains, borderline results obtained with the BACTEC 460TB method, the presence of microcolonies determined using the agar proportion (AP) method, and a lack of agreement between these two testing methods. To assess the frequency of these problems, M. tuberculosis drug susceptibility data were collected in a multicenter study involving four laboratories. Resistant, borderline, and susceptible isolates were shared among the laboratories to measure interlaboratory test agreement. Half of isolates determined by BACTEC 460TB to be resistant were determined to be susceptible by the AP method. Isolates determined to be resistant to EMB by both BACTEC 460TB and AP methods were almost always resistant to isoniazid. Results from isolates tested by the BACTEC 460TB method with an EMB concentration of 3.75 g/ml in addition to the standard 2.5 g/ml did not show improved agreement by the AP method. While these results do not indicate that the AP method is more accurate than the BACTEC 460TB method, laboratories should not report EMB monoresistance based on BACTEC 460TB results alone. Monoresistance to EMB should only be reported following confirmation by the AP method. Microcolonies could not be confirmed as resistant by the BACTEC 460TB method or by repeat testing with the AP method and do not appear to be indicative of resistance.Radiometric detection of bacterial growth (BACTEC 460TB system; Becton Dickinson and Company, Sparks, Md.) is the most commonly used method in the United States for determining resistance to the primary drugs used to treat Mycobacterium tuberculosis disease (15). This technique was designed to provide rapid susceptibility test results for streptomycin (SM), isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RIF), and ethambutol (EMB) that are equivalent to those obtained by the reference agar proportion (AP) method using Middlebrook agar (7,9,10,12,13).Testing of M. tuberculosis for susceptibility to EMB can be problematic by both the radiometric and AP methods. This may be due to the bacteriostatic nature of EMB, the reduced activity of the drug in a culture medium, or the narrow range between the MICs of susceptible and resistant isolates of M. tuberculosis (4, 6). While the radiometric method has been modified over the years, whether it accurately determines susceptibility to EMB remains in question (5,9,14,16,17). Decisions are unclear on the interpretation and reporting of small colonies of mycobacteria (microcolonies) as resistant mutants on the EMB drug quadrant by AP testing (11). To characterize the extent of these problems with EMB susceptibility testing and provide further information for assistance with test interpretation, we collected and analyzed data from four public health laboratories in a multicenter study. MATERIALS AND METHODSStudy design. Mycobacteriol...

Maternal colonization with Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is a primary risk factor for early-onset disease (EOD) GBS infection in infants and intrapartum prophylaxis reduces neonatal infection.…