Two heterogeneously vancomycin-intermediate clinical isolates of methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a Turkish university hospital: brief report of a surveillance study

Torun, Müzeyyen Mamal; Bahar, Hrisi; Demırci, Mehmet; Altaş, Kemal; Bağdatlı, Yaşar; Kocazeybek, Bekir; Kapi, Maria; Hiramatsu, Kazumasa

doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2005.09.001

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…27 Over the past 15 years, MRSA infection has become a major concern in patients with DFI. This is related to multiple factors, including the increasing frequency of diabetesrelated foot problems, the growing rate of infections (especially community-acquired soft tissue infections) caused by MRSA, 25,[27][28][29][30][31][32][33] the concern about vancomycinresistant MRSA strains infecting diabetic patients, 34,35 rising vancomycin MIC levels for MRSA strains, 23,27 and recognition of tropisms of different staphylococcal species for bone. 36 Thus, we thought it would be important for clinicians to know if the presence of MRSA in DFI might negatively affect outcomes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Diabetic Foot Infections With Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureusDiffer From Those With Other Pathogens?

Zenelaj

Bouvet

Lipsky

et al. 2014

The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is controversy as to whether or not diabetic foot infections (DFIs) caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are associated with worse outcomes than DFIs caused by other pathogens. To address this issue we performed a nonsystematic literature search of published articles in English language journals seeking studies reporting on the outcomes of DFIs related to their microbiology. We retrieved 48 articles published from 1999 to 2013 that described a total of 7771 cases of DFI. The overall proportion of DFIs with an isolate of S aureus was about 30%; just over one third of these (11% of all cases) were MRSA strains. Among the DFI cases caused by MRSA 1543 were episodes of soft tissue infections and 113 of osteomyelitis, while non-MRSA organisms caused 5761 soft tissue infections and 354 cases of osteomyelitis. Only 5 of the included articles attempted a comparison between DFI caused by MRSA and those caused by other pathogens, with no clear differences noted. The median total duration of antibiotic therapy for DFI caused by MRSA was 26 days, of which a median of 10 days was given intravenously. Only a few articles reported the proportion of patients with a recurrence, but they often did not differentiate between MRSA and non-MRSA cases. Four publications reported a worse functional or microbiological outcome in MRSA, compared to non-MRSA, cases, but the findings were variable and differences did not seem to be significant. Many trials failed to adjust for case-mix or to definitively demonstrate a relationship between microbiology and outcomes. Few of the articles specifically commented on whether the MRSA isolates were health care- or community-acquired strains. Notwithstanding the substantial limitations of the available literature, there does not appear to be a need for any special treatment for DFI caused by MRSA. The current guidelines for treating according to established international recommendations seem appropriate.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Diabetic Foot Infections With Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureusDiffer From Those With Other Pathogens?

Zenelaj

Bouvet

Lipsky

et al. 2014

The International Journal of Lower Extremity Wounds

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Turkey, some isolates showing reduced susceptibility or intermediate resistance for vancomycin had also been reported. Torun et al (2005) reported two heterogeneously vancomycin-intermediate clinical isolates of methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant S. aureus . Sancak et al (2005) have also documented a MRSA isolate displaying heterogeneous resistance to vancomycin in a Turkish university hospital.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro susceptibility to methicillin, vancomycin and linezolid of staphylococci isolated from bloodstream infections in eastern Turkey

Tekin¹,

Dal²,

Deveci³

et al. 2014

Braz. J. Microbiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Staphylococcus species are one of the major causes of bacterial bloodstream infections. Multi-resistant staphylococci infections are major therapeutic problems. This study was aimed to detect methicillin, linezolid and vancomycin susceptibilities of Staphylococcus isolates. A total of 870 Staphylococcus strains isolated from blood cultures of hospitalized patients with BSI. Antimicrobial susceptibilities of methicillin, linezolid and vancomycin were detected according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). A total of 771 (88.6%) isolates were coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS). 700 (80.5%) isolates were methicillin-resistant (MR) and 170 (19.5%) were methicillin-susceptible (MS). All the MS isolates were also susceptible to linezolid. However 15 (1.7%) of MR strains were resistant to linezolid. The minimum inhibitory concentration range for the linezolid-resistant isolates by Etest was 6–32 μg/mL. The difference between linezolid susceptibilities for MS and MR staphylococci was not quite statistically significant (p = 0.052). There was no statistically significant difference between S. aureus and CoNS isolates for linezolid susceptibility. All of the isolates were susceptible to vancomycin. In conclusion, linezolid is currently an efficient option for the treatment of methicillin-resistant staphylococci infections.

show abstract

“…(22) % 18, Torun ve ark. (26) ise % 0.2 oranında hVISA saptadıklarını bildirmişlerdir. 2013 yılında ülkemiz-den bildirilen iki farklı çalışmanın ilkinde; kandan izole edilen MRSA izolatlarında hVISA oranı % 13.7 olarak saptanmış; ikinci çalışmada ise beş yıllık periyodda izole edilen 102 MRSA suşunun 3'ünde hVISA saptandığı rapor edilmiştir (21,23) .…”

Section: Bulgularunclassified

Methicillin, Vancomycin, Teicoplanin and Macrolide-Lincosamide-Streptogramin B (MLSB) Resistance in Staphylococcus aureus Isolated from Postmortem Samples

ZİYADE¹,

YAĞMUR²,

ELGÖRMÜŞ³

et al. 2015

Ankem Derg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ÖZET The effective antibiotherapy of infections caused by staphylococci is closely associated with the determination of antibiotic resistance. The increase in the methicillin-resistance of staphylococci, which leads to resistance to other antibiotics, renders the therapy and control of staphylococcal infections difficult, which may be fatal. The purpose of this study was to determine the susceptibility to methicillin and glycopeptides and resistance to macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B (MLS B ) of 136 strains of Staphylococcus aureus isolated in the Postmortem Microbiology Laboratory of the Forensic Medicine Institute. According to the suggestions of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI), methicillin-resistance was assessed on Mueller-Hinton agar (MHA) using cefoxitin disks (30 µg,

show abstract

Two heterogeneously vancomycin-intermediate clinical isolates of methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a Turkish university hospital: brief report of a surveillance study

Cited by 7 publications

References 18 publications

Do Diabetic Foot Infections With Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureusDiffer From Those With Other Pathogens?

Do Diabetic Foot Infections With Methicillin-ResistantStaphylococcus aureusDiffer From Those With Other Pathogens?

In vitro susceptibility to methicillin, vancomycin and linezolid of staphylococci isolated from bloodstream infections in eastern Turkey

Methicillin, Vancomycin, Teicoplanin and Macrolide-Lincosamide-Streptogramin B (MLSB) Resistance in Staphylococcus aureus Isolated from Postmortem Samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About