ArticleJournal of clinical pathology2002
Detection of methicillin and mupirocin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus isolates using conventional and molecular methods: a descriptive study from a burns unit with high prevalence of MRSA.
Article in Journal of clinical pathology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.
- Novel multidrug-resistant sublineages ofmSphere · 2023Article
- Prevalence and antibiotic resistance ofVeterinary world · 2022Article
- Comparison of PCR and phenotypic methods for the detection of methicillin resistantIranian journal of microbiology · 2021Article
- High prevalence of direct repeat unit types of 10di, 8 h and 8i among methicillin resistantAntimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2019Article
- Article
- Expert systems in clinical microbiology.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2011Review
- Comparison of real-time PCR with disk diffusion, agar screen and E-test methods for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.Current microbiology · 2010Article
- Development of a latex agglutination test for norovirus detection.Journal of microbiology (Seoul, Korea) · 2010Article
- Genotyping of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains from two hospitals in Bangalore, South India.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2005Article
- Prevalence of Mupirocin Resistance Among Staphylococci, its Clinical Significance and Relationship to Clinical Use.Journal of laboratory physiciansArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsTo compare conventional phenotypic methods for the detection of methicillin and mupirocin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus in routine laboratory practice with reference to an established molecular method.
methodsThis study was conducted on a selection of 65 isolates of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from a burns unit in India which is endemic for MRSA. The Kirby-Bauer and modified Stokes disc diffusion tests and the Vitek breakpoint minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) were performed on all isolates using the presence of the mecA gene as the reference standard. Gel based and colorimetric polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays were evaluated as molecular methods for the diagnosis of MRSA. A commercial latex agglutination test, the Mastalex, was assessed for the detection of penicillin binding protein 2a (PBP2a), the mecA gene product. Conventional disc diffusion and molecular methods were investigated for the detection of mupirocin resistance.
resultsFifty one of 65 isolates were positive for the mecA gene. All three phenotypic methods showed high sensitivity (> 96.2%), whereas the specificity varied: 50% for Kirby-Bauer, 87.5% for modified Stokes, and 93.3% for Vitek. The colorimetric PCR was less cumbersome than the gel based PCR; there was complete concordance between both systems. The Mastalex kit showed good correlation with PCR. One isolate was found to be mupirocin resistant and harboured the mupA gene.
conclusionsThe specificity of routine laboratory tests for MRSA detection was variable. mecA gene detection, the "gold standard" to confirm ambiguous results, is difficult to perform in routine diagnostic laboratories. The Mastalex kit for the detection of PBP2a is an alternative that could be used in most laboratories. High level mupirocin resistance can be confirmed with genotypic methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.