南印度金黄色葡萄球菌和凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌诱导克林霉素耐药的检测

Shailesh Kumar, S. Umadevi, N. Joseph, A. Kali, J. Easow, S. Srirangaraj, G. Kandhakumari, R. Singh, Pravin M. V. Charles, S. Stephen
{"title":"南印度金黄色葡萄球菌和凝固酶阴性葡萄球菌诱导克林霉素耐药的检测","authors":"Shailesh Kumar, S. Umadevi, N. Joseph, A. Kali, J. Easow, S. Srirangaraj, G. Kandhakumari, R. Singh, Pravin M. V. Charles, S. Stephen","doi":"10.5580/1279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Inducible clindamycin resistance is a major concern for the use of clindamycin to treat staphylococcal infections. Aims: To determine the prevalence of inducible clindamycin resistance in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus spp. and the susceptibility pattern of the isolates. Materials and Methods: A total of 300 isolates of Staphylococci spp. recovered from different clinical specimens were studied. All the Staphylococcus spp. were identified by conventional microbiological methods. Inducible clindamycin resistance was detected by double disk approximation test (Dtest).Results: Of the 300 isolates, 176 were identified as S. aureus, while 124 were coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS). The rates of inducible clindamycin resistance in methicillin resistant S. aureus (MRSA), methicillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA), methicillin resistant CoNS (MR-CoNS) and methicillin sensitive CoNS (MSCoNS) were 75.0%, 24%, 18.8% and 11.1%, respectively. The inducible clindamycin resistance was significantly more among MRSA compared to methicillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) (P value < 0.0001). Majority of the MRSA isolates were susceptible to clindamycin, vancomycin and linezolid, while most of them were resistant to erythromycin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim. Conclusion: In view of the significant in vitro inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus spp., we recommend that D test should be used as a mandatory method in microbiology laboratories to avoid misinterpretation of clindamycin result.","PeriodicalId":22514,"journal":{"name":"The Internet journal of microbiology","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detection of inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci - a study from South India\",\"authors\":\"Shailesh Kumar, S. Umadevi, N. Joseph, A. Kali, J. Easow, S. Srirangaraj, G. Kandhakumari, R. Singh, Pravin M. V. Charles, S. Stephen\",\"doi\":\"10.5580/1279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Inducible clindamycin resistance is a major concern for the use of clindamycin to treat staphylococcal infections. Aims: To determine the prevalence of inducible clindamycin resistance in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus spp. and the susceptibility pattern of the isolates. Materials and Methods: A total of 300 isolates of Staphylococci spp. recovered from different clinical specimens were studied. All the Staphylococcus spp. were identified by conventional microbiological methods. Inducible clindamycin resistance was detected by double disk approximation test (Dtest).Results: Of the 300 isolates, 176 were identified as S. aureus, while 124 were coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS). The rates of inducible clindamycin resistance in methicillin resistant S. aureus (MRSA), methicillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA), methicillin resistant CoNS (MR-CoNS) and methicillin sensitive CoNS (MSCoNS) were 75.0%, 24%, 18.8% and 11.1%, respectively. The inducible clindamycin resistance was significantly more among MRSA compared to methicillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) (P value < 0.0001). Majority of the MRSA isolates were susceptible to clindamycin, vancomycin and linezolid, while most of them were resistant to erythromycin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim. Conclusion: In view of the significant in vitro inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus spp., we recommend that D test should be used as a mandatory method in microbiology laboratories to avoid misinterpretation of clindamycin result.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Internet journal of microbiology\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Internet journal of microbiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5580/1279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Internet journal of microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5580/1279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

背景:诱导克林霉素耐药是使用克林霉素治疗葡萄球菌感染的主要问题。目的:了解葡萄球菌临床分离株诱导型克林霉素耐药情况及药敏型。材料与方法:对从不同临床标本中分离的葡萄球菌300株进行了研究。所有葡萄球菌均采用常规微生物学方法进行鉴定。采用双盘近似试验(Dtest)检测诱导型克林霉素耐药。结果:300株分离物中,鉴定为金黄色葡萄球菌176株,凝血酶阴性葡萄球菌124株。耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)、耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)、耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MR-CoNS)和耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MSCoNS)诱导克林霉素耐药率分别为75.0%、24%、18.8%和11.1%。与甲氧西林敏感金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)相比,MRSA对克林霉素的诱导性耐药明显增加(P值< 0.0001)。大部分MRSA菌株对克林霉素、万古霉素和利奈唑胺敏感,对红霉素、庆大霉素、环丙沙星、四环素和磺胺甲恶唑-甲氧苄啶耐药。结论:鉴于葡萄球菌具有明显的体外诱导克林霉素耐药性,建议微生物实验室将D试验作为强制性方法,避免对克林霉素结果的误读。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Detection of inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci - a study from South India
Background: Inducible clindamycin resistance is a major concern for the use of clindamycin to treat staphylococcal infections. Aims: To determine the prevalence of inducible clindamycin resistance in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus spp. and the susceptibility pattern of the isolates. Materials and Methods: A total of 300 isolates of Staphylococci spp. recovered from different clinical specimens were studied. All the Staphylococcus spp. were identified by conventional microbiological methods. Inducible clindamycin resistance was detected by double disk approximation test (Dtest).Results: Of the 300 isolates, 176 were identified as S. aureus, while 124 were coagulase negative staphylococci (CoNS). The rates of inducible clindamycin resistance in methicillin resistant S. aureus (MRSA), methicillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA), methicillin resistant CoNS (MR-CoNS) and methicillin sensitive CoNS (MSCoNS) were 75.0%, 24%, 18.8% and 11.1%, respectively. The inducible clindamycin resistance was significantly more among MRSA compared to methicillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) (P value < 0.0001). Majority of the MRSA isolates were susceptible to clindamycin, vancomycin and linezolid, while most of them were resistant to erythromycin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, tetracycline and sulfamethoxazole-trimethoprim. Conclusion: In view of the significant in vitro inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus spp., we recommend that D test should be used as a mandatory method in microbiology laboratories to avoid misinterpretation of clindamycin result.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Case Of Fatal Diphtheria In A Paediatric Patient Identification and Characterization of a Putative Chemotaxis Protein, CheY, from the Oral Pathogen Campylobacter rectus. Oro-Pharyngeal Carriage And Antimicrobial Susceptibility Of Streptococcus Pneumoniae From Healthy Children Isolation, Electron Microscopy And Physicochemical Characterization Of A Brucellaphage Against Brucella Abortus Vaccine Strain S19 Comparison Of Prevalence And Antimicrobial Sensitivity Of Salmonella typhimurium In Apparently Healthy Cattle And Goat In Sango-Ota, Nigeria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1