Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24247138›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2014

Activities of vancomycin, ceftaroline, and mupirocin against Staphylococcus aureus isolates collected in a 2011 national surveillance study in the United States.

Sandra S Richter, Daniel J Diekema, Kristopher P Heilmann, Cassie L Dohrn, Emily K Crispell, Fathollah Riahi, Jennifer S McDanel, Sarah W Satola, Gary V Doern

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Biographical Feature: Gary V. Doern, Ph.D.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2015
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sandra S RichterCleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.
Daniel J Diekema
Kristopher P Heilmann
Cassie L Dohrn
Emily K Crispell
Fathollah Riahi
Jennifer S McDanel
Sarah W Satola
Gary V Doern
University of Iowa · USEmory University · USCleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forty-two medical centers from throughout the United States participating in a longitudinal surveillance program were asked to submit 100 consecutive Staphylococcus aureus isolates during July to December 2011. Susceptibility testing using CLSI broth microdilution and mecA detection by PCR analysis was performed on the 4,131 isolates collected. Methods employing Etest glycopeptide resistance detection (GRD; bioMérieux) and brain heart infusion agar containing 4 μg/ml vancomycin (BHIV) were used to screen methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) isolates for heterogeneous intermediate-level resistance to vancomycin (hVISA). Isolates with positive hVISA screen results were confirmed by population analysis profiling-area under the curve (PAP-AUC) determinations. The genetic relatedness of hVISA, ceftaroline-nonsusceptible, or high-level (HL) mupirocin resistance MRSA isolates was assessed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). Among 2,093 MRSA isolates, the hVISA screen results were positive with 47 isolates by Etest GRD and 30 isolates by BHIV agar screen. Twenty-five of the GRD- or BHIV screen-positive isolates were confirmed as hVISA by PAP-AUC testing. Results of the current study were compared to results obtained from prior surveillance performed in 2009. The prevalence of hVISA among MRSA isolates was higher in 2011 than in 2009 (1.2% versus 0.4%, P = 0.003), especially for isolates with a vancomycin MIC of 2 (45.4% versus 14.3%, P = 0.01). The overall rate of ceftaroline susceptibility in the current study was 99.4% (one hVISA isolate had an intermediate ceftaroline MIC). HL mupirocin resistance increased from 2.2% in 2009 to 3.2% in 2011 (P = 0.006). Although overall rates of hVISA and HL mupirocin resistance are low, they have increased since 2009.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCeftarolineCephalosporinsElectrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-FieldEpidemiological MonitoringHumansMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMupirocinStaphylococcal InfectionsUnited StatesVancomycinVancomycin ResistanceAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftarolineCephalosporinsMupirocinVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID24247138
PMCPMC3910823
OpenAlexW2019028336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.