Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Ninety clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolates from separate patients were examined phenotypically and genotypically for susceptibility to methicillin/oxacillin. Thirty were methicillin/oxacillin susceptible and 60 were methicillin and oxacillin resistant (MRSA). The 60 MRSA isolates examined were subdivided into two groups according to their antibiotic profiles and comprised 30 non-multidrug-resistant (NMDR) isolates, resistant to less than two non-beta-lactam antibiotics, and 30 multidrug-resistant (MDR) isolates, resistant to three or more non-beta-lactam antibiotics. Phenotypic and genotypic analysis of methicillin/oxacillin showed that despite use of the guidelines published by the NCCLS for the testing of S. aureus susceptibility to methicillin/oxacillin, MIC values of some NMDR MRSA isolates fell below the NCCLS-recommended breakpoints. Etest strips failed to detect two NMDR MRSA isolates tested with oxacillin and four tested with methicillin. Lowering the NCCLS-recommended oxacillin screen agar concentration from 6 to 2 mg/L and temperature of incubation to 30 degrees C, improved the specificity and sensitivity of NMDR MRSA detection from 87% to 100%. On PFGE analysis these NMDR MRSA strains were genotypically different. Genotypic tests, such as multiplex PCR for the mecA/nuc genes and DNA hybridization for the mecA gene, or phenotypic monoclonal antibody-based tests to detect penicillin-binding protein 2a (PBP2a) offer advantages for problematic isolates in detecting or confirming low-level phenotypic heterogeneous mecA expression of oxacillin and methicillin resistance in NMDR MRSA.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
John Merlino (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: