4.7 Article

High diversity of Panton-Valentine leukocidin-positive, methicillin-susceptible isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and implications for the evolution of community-associated methicillin-resistant S-aureus

期刊

CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION
卷 13, 期 12, 页码 1157-1164

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2007.01833.x

关键词

community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; evolution; microarray screening; methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Panton-Valentine leukocidin; Staphylococcus aureus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In total, 100 Staphylococcus aureus isolates from diverse cases of skin and soft-tissue infection at a university hospital in Saxony, Germany, were characterised using diagnostic microarrays. Virulence factors, including Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL), were detected and the isolates were assigned to clonal groups. Thirty isolates were positive for the genes encoding PVL. Only three PVL-positive methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) isolates were found, two of which belonged to European clone ST80-MRSA IV and one to USA300 strain ST8-MRSA IV. The remaining methicillin-susceptible PVL-positive isolates belonged to a variety of different multilocus sequence types. The predominant strains were agrI/ST22, agrII/CC5, agrIII/CC30 and agrIV/ST121. In order to check for possible bias caused by regional or local outbreak strains, an additional 18 methicillin-susceptible, PVL-positive isolates from the UK were tested. Approximately two-thirds of the UK isolates belonged to types that also comprised approximately two-thirds of the isolates from Saxony. Some methicillin-susceptible PVL-positive isolates (agrI/ST152, agrIII/ST80 and agrIII/ST96) closely resembled known epidemic community-acquired MRSA (CaMRSA) strains. These findings indicate that the current rise in PVL-positive CaMRSA could be caused by the dissemination of novel SCCmec elements among pre-existing PVL-positive strains, rather than by the spread of PVL phages among MRSA strains.

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

4.7
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