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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pourmand, Mohammad Reza, Hassanzadeh, Sepideh, Mashhadi, Rahil, Askari, Emran
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