4.5 Article

Characterization of the clonal profile of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from patients with early post-operative orthopedic implant based infections

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12941-019-0307-z

关键词

MRSA; Orthopedic implants; Post-operative infections; Epidemiology

资金

  1. Ministry of Science, Department of Science and Technology, India [SR/WOS-A/LS-1021/2015]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To analyze the molecular epidemiology and to compare between the major methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus biotypes for association with patient characteristics who had an implant for closed fracture and developed early post-operative wound infections (POWI) in a tertiary care hospital of India. Methods: Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), antimicrobial resistance, accessory gene regulator (agr) and staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec) types, Paton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) gene, toxin gene profiling, biofilm formation and patient demographics were correlated with MLST clonal complexes (CC). Findings: Overall eight different sequence types (STs) were detected with a predominance of ST239 (66%), ST22 (18%) and some minor types ST772, ST30 (4% each) ST1, ST642, ST6, ST107 (2% each). All ST239 isolates belong to CC239 and SCCmec III whereas ST22 isolates belong to CC22 and SCCmec IV. The isolates varied in the distribution of various toxin genes. With 63.63% biofilm formers ST239 were all multidrug resistant with frequent resistance to erythromycin, clindamycin, gentamicin, cefuroxime, amoxyclav and ciprofloxacin indicating doxycycline, amikacin, vancomycin and linezolid can be the drug of choice. Conclusion: This study shows that ST239 MRSA is still most prevalent strain with new emergence of ST642 and ST107 isolates in association with orthopedic implant based POWI. As compare to other ST types ST239 strain was associated with adverse treatment outcomes. This highlights the importance of improving nosocomial infection control measures in this unit.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据