Cargando…
Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections
108 isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, belonging to six large ribogroups according to the automated Ribo-Printer(®) system, were studied with two highly used molecular methods for epidemiological studies, namely multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) and spa typing, followed by BURP and eBURST v3 analys...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8835750/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35163582 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms23031660 |
_version_ | 1784649508945133568 |
---|---|
author | Ravaioli, Stefano Campoccia, Davide Ruppitsch, Werner Allerberger, Franz Poggi, Alessandro Chisari, Emanuele Montanaro, Lucio Arciola, Carla Renata |
author_facet | Ravaioli, Stefano Campoccia, Davide Ruppitsch, Werner Allerberger, Franz Poggi, Alessandro Chisari, Emanuele Montanaro, Lucio Arciola, Carla Renata |
author_sort | Ravaioli, Stefano |
collection | PubMed |
description | 108 isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, belonging to six large ribogroups according to the automated Ribo-Printer(®) system, were studied with two highly used molecular methods for epidemiological studies, namely multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) and spa typing, followed by BURP and eBURST v3 analysis for clustering spa types and sequence (ST) types. The aim was to evaluate whether automated ribotyping could be considered a useful screening tool for identifying S. aureus genetic lineages with respect to spa typing and MLST. Clarifying the relationship of riboprinting with these typing methods and establishing whether ribogroups fit single clonal complexes were two main objectives. Further information on the genetic profile of the isolates was obtained from agr typing and the search for the mecA, tst genes, and the IS256 insertion sequence. Automated ribotyping has been shown to predict spa clonal complexes and MLST clonal complexes. The high cost and lower discriminatory power of automated ribotyping compared to spa and MSLT typing could be an obstacle to fine genotyping analyzes, especially when high discriminatory power is required. On the other hand, numerous advantages such as automation, ease and speed of execution, stability, typeability and reproducibility make ribotyping a reliable method to be juxtaposed to gold standard methods. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8835750 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88357502022-02-12 Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections Ravaioli, Stefano Campoccia, Davide Ruppitsch, Werner Allerberger, Franz Poggi, Alessandro Chisari, Emanuele Montanaro, Lucio Arciola, Carla Renata Int J Mol Sci Article 108 isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, belonging to six large ribogroups according to the automated Ribo-Printer(®) system, were studied with two highly used molecular methods for epidemiological studies, namely multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) and spa typing, followed by BURP and eBURST v3 analysis for clustering spa types and sequence (ST) types. The aim was to evaluate whether automated ribotyping could be considered a useful screening tool for identifying S. aureus genetic lineages with respect to spa typing and MLST. Clarifying the relationship of riboprinting with these typing methods and establishing whether ribogroups fit single clonal complexes were two main objectives. Further information on the genetic profile of the isolates was obtained from agr typing and the search for the mecA, tst genes, and the IS256 insertion sequence. Automated ribotyping has been shown to predict spa clonal complexes and MLST clonal complexes. The high cost and lower discriminatory power of automated ribotyping compared to spa and MSLT typing could be an obstacle to fine genotyping analyzes, especially when high discriminatory power is required. On the other hand, numerous advantages such as automation, ease and speed of execution, stability, typeability and reproducibility make ribotyping a reliable method to be juxtaposed to gold standard methods. MDPI 2022-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8835750/ /pubmed/35163582 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms23031660 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Ravaioli, Stefano Campoccia, Davide Ruppitsch, Werner Allerberger, Franz Poggi, Alessandro Chisari, Emanuele Montanaro, Lucio Arciola, Carla Renata Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections |
title | Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections |
title_full | Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections |
title_short | Comparison of Automated Ribotyping, spa Typing, and MLST in 108 Clinical Isolates of Staphylococcus aureus from Orthopedic Infections |
title_sort | comparison of automated ribotyping, spa typing, and mlst in 108 clinical isolates of staphylococcus aureus from orthopedic infections |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8835750/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35163582 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms23031660 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ravaiolistefano comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections AT campocciadavide comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections AT ruppitschwerner comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections AT allerbergerfranz comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections AT poggialessandro comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections AT chisariemanuele comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections AT montanarolucio comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections AT arciolacarlarenata comparisonofautomatedribotypingspatypingandmlstin108clinicalisolatesofstaphylococcusaureusfromorthopedicinfections |