Cargando…
Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a well-known pathogen with a worldwide distribution. Given the increasing rate of MRSA infections, implementing of reliable, accurate and rapid testing for diagnosis of MRSA is necessary. The aim of this study was to co...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Tehran University of Medical Sciences
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4385575/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25848525 |
_version_ | 1782365051702738944 |
---|---|
author | Pourmand, Mohammad Reza Hassanzadeh, Sepideh Mashhadi, Rahil Askari, Emran |
author_facet | Pourmand, Mohammad Reza Hassanzadeh, Sepideh Mashhadi, Rahil Askari, Emran |
author_sort | Pourmand, Mohammad Reza |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a well-known pathogen with a worldwide distribution. Given the increasing rate of MRSA infections, implementing of reliable, accurate and rapid testing for diagnosis of MRSA is necessary. The aim of this study was to compare four diagnostic methods for detection of MRSA isolates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From December 2012 to April 2014, 120 S. aureus isolates were collected from three hospitals affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences. MRSA isolates were detected by four different methods including cefoxitin disc diffusion test, oxacillin disc diffusion test, minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of oxacillin as determined by MIC test strip, and mecA detection by PCR. RESULTS: Out of 120 S. aureus isolates, cefoxitin disc diffusion test, oxacillin disc diffusion test and MIC test strip identified 60 (50%), 48 (40%), 55 (45.83%) isolates as MRSA, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for oxacillin disc diffusion, cefoxitin disc diffusion and MIC of oxacillin were 80% and 100%, 100% and 100%, and 91.6% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cefoxitin disc diffusion test is reliable substitute for detection of MRSA in clinical laboratory where MIC detection and molecular methods are not accessible. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4385575 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Tehran University of Medical Sciences |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43855752015-04-06 Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus Pourmand, Mohammad Reza Hassanzadeh, Sepideh Mashhadi, Rahil Askari, Emran Iran J Microbiol Medical Sciences BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a well-known pathogen with a worldwide distribution. Given the increasing rate of MRSA infections, implementing of reliable, accurate and rapid testing for diagnosis of MRSA is necessary. The aim of this study was to compare four diagnostic methods for detection of MRSA isolates. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From December 2012 to April 2014, 120 S. aureus isolates were collected from three hospitals affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences. MRSA isolates were detected by four different methods including cefoxitin disc diffusion test, oxacillin disc diffusion test, minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of oxacillin as determined by MIC test strip, and mecA detection by PCR. RESULTS: Out of 120 S. aureus isolates, cefoxitin disc diffusion test, oxacillin disc diffusion test and MIC test strip identified 60 (50%), 48 (40%), 55 (45.83%) isolates as MRSA, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity for oxacillin disc diffusion, cefoxitin disc diffusion and MIC of oxacillin were 80% and 100%, 100% and 100%, and 91.6% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Cefoxitin disc diffusion test is reliable substitute for detection of MRSA in clinical laboratory where MIC detection and molecular methods are not accessible. Tehran University of Medical Sciences 2014-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4385575/ /pubmed/25848525 Text en Copyright: © Iranian Journal of Microbiology & Tehran University of Medical Sciences This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License which allows users to read, copy, distribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes from the material, as long as the author of the original work is cited properly. |
spellingShingle | Medical Sciences Pourmand, Mohammad Reza Hassanzadeh, Sepideh Mashhadi, Rahil Askari, Emran Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus |
title | Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus |
title_full | Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus |
title_fullStr | Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus |
title_short | Comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus |
title_sort | comparison of four diagnostic methods for detection of methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus |
topic | Medical Sciences |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4385575/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25848525 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pourmandmohammadreza comparisonoffourdiagnosticmethodsfordetectionofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT hassanzadehsepideh comparisonoffourdiagnosticmethodsfordetectionofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT mashhadirahil comparisonoffourdiagnosticmethodsfordetectionofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus AT askariemran comparisonoffourdiagnosticmethodsfordetectionofmethicillinresistantstaphylococcusaureus |