Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, June 1999, p. 2090-2092, Vol. 37, No. 6
Department of Pathology and Molecular
Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8N
3Z5,1 and Microbiology Section,
Hamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program, Hamilton Health
Sciences Corporation, General Campus, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8L
2X22
Received 2 December 1998/Returned for modification 22 January
1999/Accepted 17 March 1999
This study evaluated a PCR method for the rapid detection of
clinically significant genotypes of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in nosocomial surveillance specimens. Detection of the
vanA and vanB genes by
multiplex PCR using 657 specimens that showed presumptive
growth of VRE on bile esculin azide agar containing 6 mg of
vancomycin/liter was compared to the conventional method. The
diagnostic values for the PCR compared to the phenotypic method were as follows: 99.8% specificity, 95.4% sensitivity, 98.8%
positive predictive value, and 99.3% negative predictive value. The
average cost per test for PCR is $8.26, compared to $9.45 for the
phenotypic method. The average turnaround time for detecting a VRE is
48 h for PCR, compared to 96 h for the conventional method.
Since the late 1980s
vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) have emerged as an
important cause of nosocomial infections. They are the third most
common cause of hospital-acquired bacteremia (5). Outbreaks
with VRE are also being reported with increasing frequency in many
countries (1). The National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance (NNIS) system in the United States has reported
an increase of VRE since 1989 (1). Recent data from
The Surveillance Network database (TSN) in the United States for
1997 indicate that about 15% of all enterococci are
resistant to vancomycin (4). The prevalence of VRE in
Canadian hospitals has been substantially lower. A point prevalence
study carried out by the Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance
Program (CNISP) in 1996 reported prevalences of 0.1 and 3.7% in
hospitals in which VRE are not and are endemic, respectively
(6).
Rapid identification of VRE-colonized patients is essential for the
implementation of appropriate control measures to prevent the spread of
VRE. Routine culture methods are time-consuming and expensive for the
laboratory handling a large number of specimens. The microbiology lab
at Hamilton Civic Hospitals receives an average of 1,200 VRE
surveillance culture orders per month. PCR-based techniques that have
been reported (7, 8) as alternative methods for detecting
and identifying VRE directly from fecal samples are not cost-effective,
especially when one is dealing with a large number of specimens and a
low prevalence. The objective of the present study was to develop a
simple, rapid, and cost-effective PCR method that could be used to
detect vanA and vanB genes from the presumptive
growth of VRE on bile esculin azide agar containing 6 mg of
vancomycin/liter (BEAA-V6) as a routine method of
screening nosocomial surveillance specimens. The new
DNA-based method was compared with conventional culture and
evaluated for its cost-effectiveness.
A total of 657 rectal swab specimens that produced black colonies on
BEAA-V6 (PML Microbiologicals, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada) were used
for the study. Cell suspensions of black colonies from BEAA-V6 in 0.5 N
saline were prepared to a density equivalent to a McFarland standard of
1. Fifty microliters of the cell suspension was mixed with 50 µl
of lysis buffer containing 15% Chelex-100 (Bio-Rad Laboratories,
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada), 1% Brij 58 (Sigma Chemical Company,
Mississuga, Ontario, Canada), and 1% Tween 20 (Bio-Rad), and the
mixture was heated for 15 min at 95°C. It was then centrifuged for 2 min, and 2 µl of clear liquid was used as the template for PCR.
Two in-frame DNA fragments of 732 and 635 bp, corresponding to
vanA and vanB genes (2), respectively, were coamplified with a 370-bp universal eubacterial target (16S ribosomal DNA [rDNA]) (3) as an internal PCR control.
After the conditions were optimized, the 25-µl PCR mix contained 1.5 mM MgCl2, 1× PCR buffer, 250 µM (each) dATP, dCTP,
dGTP, and dTTP (Boehringer Mannheim, Laval, Quebec,
Canada), 15 pmol of each vanA primer (forward,
175-GGGAAAACGACAATTGC-191; reverse,
907-GTACAATGCGCCGTTA-891), 30 pmol of each
vanB primer (forward,
173-ATGGGAAGCCGATAGTC-189; reverse,
807-GATTTCGTTCCTCGACC-791), 3 pmol of each 16S rDNA
universal target primer (forward,
1170-AACTGGAGGAAGGTGGGGAT-1189; reverse, 1522-AGGAGGTGATCCAACCGCA-1540) (Mobix, McMaster University,
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada), and 1.25 U of AmpliTaq DNA
polymerase (Roche Molecular Systems Inc., Branchburg, N.J.).
Prefrozen master mixes (without the enzyme) were thawed, and
aliquots were dispensed into PCR tubes after the enzyme was
added. Two microliters of the DNA preparation was added to the reaction
mixes and cycled with a temperature profile of 94°C for 30 s,
54°C for 30 s, and 72°C for 45 s in a GeneAmp PCR system
9700 (Perkin-Elmer Applied Biosystems, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada)
for 30 cycles. A 5-min denaturation step at 94°C was included at the
beginning of the cycling, and at the end a final 7-min extension step
at 72°C was included. A vanA strain (Enterococcus
faecalis), a vanB strain (Enterococcus
faecium), and a vancomycin-susceptible E. faecalis strain (ATCC 29212) were run with each set of reactions as positive and
negative controls.
PCR products were size separated by electrophoresis on 1% agarose
(Promega Corporation, Madison, Wis.) gels containing 0.5 mg of ethidium
bromide/liter to detect vanA, vanB, and 16S rDNA targets. A PCR ruler (100 bp) (Bio-Rad) was used as the
molecular-size marker. Gel images were photodocumented by using a
Gel Doc 1000 (Bio-Rad) for interpretation. Cell suspensions that did
not show amplification of the universal target (370-bp product)
were subcultured onto colistin-nalidixic acid agar (CNA), from which
PCR was repeated the next day. Routine culture and phenotypic
identification of VRE were carried out by Gram staining (Quelab
Laboratories Inc., Montreal, Quebec, Canada) and with catalase (by
using H2O2) (Regal Pharmaceuticals, Burlington,
Ontario, Canada), pyrazinamidase (PML), leucine aminopeptidase (Key
Scientific, Round Rock, Tex.), o-nitrophenyl- Amplification of vanA, vanB, and 16S rDNA targets
produced distinct bands corresponding to their respective molecular
sizes that were easily recognizable (Fig.
1). Thirteen percent (83 of 657) of
presumptive growth was identified as VRE. Of these, 53 were
vanA and 30 were vanB genotypes. Five percent of
specimens (31 of 657) from BEAA-V6 were negative for the PCR
amplification control. All PCR amplification control-negative specimens
were repeated from the original BEAA-V6 plates and were negative for amplification. However, all 31 specimens produced a 370-bp band corresponding to the universal target when DNA was prepared from the
growth on CNA. Four of these were identified as VRE (three vanA and one vanB). The PCR method produced one
false-positive specimen. However, repeated testing by PCR showed it to
be a true negative, and the initial positive result was attributed to
a laboratory technologist's error. The diagnostic values for the PCR from BEAA-V6 compared to the phenotypic method as the "gold standard" were as follows: 99.8% specificity, 95.4% sensitivity, 98.8% positive predictive value, and 99.3% negative predictive value.
The use of CNA increased the sensitivity and negative predictive value
to 100%. The average turnaround time for the PCR method is 48 h
from the time of specimen setup, compared to 96 h for the routine
phenotypic method. The estimated costs for both methods are given in
Canadian dollars ($1.00 Canadian = $0.67 U.S.) in Table
1. The total cost per test for VRE
was $8.26 for PCR compared to $9.45 for culture. However, the
cost per specimen depends on the prevalence of black colonies
that are gram-positive cocci on BEAA-V6. At present at the Hamilton
Civic Hospitals, only 17.3% of all specimens produce black colonies on
BEAA-V6, and only 9% require PCR or complete investigation by culture.
At the current prevalence rate, reduced costs associated with negative
specimens on BEAA-V6 bring the cost per specimen down to $3.10 and
$2.95 for culture and PCR, respectively. The equipment cost for setting up PCR is $8,000 to $15,000 based on the workload. However, many laboratories already have the capacity to perform PCR.
0095-1137/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Detection of Clinically Relevant Genotypes of
Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci in Nosocomial Surveillance Specimens
by PCR
![]()
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
![]()
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
-D-galactopyranoside
(ONPG)-phenylalanine-Motility medium (Quelab), and brain heart infusion
agar containing 6 mg of vancomycin/liter (PML).

View larger version (103K):
[in a new window]
FIG. 1.
Agarose gel electrophoresis of PCR-amplified
vanA, vanB, and 16S rDNA gene targets from
presumptive growth on BEAA-V6 medium. The negative control,
E. faecalis ATCC 29212, was grown on CNA. Lanes 1 to 8, sample of routine nosocomial surveillance specimens; lane 9, E. faecalis ATCC 29212 (vancomycin susceptible); lane
10, an E. faecalis vanA strain; lane 11, an
E. faecium vanB strain; lane 12, 100-bp PCR ruler
(Bio-Rad).
TABLE 1.
Estimated costsa and turnaround
times for screening VRE by the conventional and PCR methods
This study examined whether PCR could be used in the clinical laboratory to replace traditional surveillance culture methods for detection of VRE in colonized patients. Since the prevalence of VRE is significantly low in our local setting (<10% of presumptive growth on BEAA-V6 is VRE), PCR methods using direct specimens are not cost-effective. In addition, such methods (7) are known to have relatively low sensitivities and do not allow for strain typing studies, an essential part of many infection control investigations. The possibility of culturing those specimens that are positive by PCR to recover enterococci for molecular typing would increase the overall cost of the surveillance system. Therefore, we examined the possibility of using presumptive growth of VRE on a screening medium (BEAA-V6) for the PCR method to overcome those limitations. Among screening media, BEAA-V6 has been proven effective and is widely used for surveillance culture of VRE (7). Since the significance of detecting vanC-containing VRE from rectal samples remains unclear (7), only vanA and vanB targets were used in the multiplex PCR. The 16S rDNA universal target is necessary to identify PCR inhibition. This is particularly important because only 13% of the specimens were VRE and 5% showed PCR inhibition when BEAA-V6 medium was used. Universal target amplification helps to identify specimens that might be considered false-negatives.
The PCR method has an added advantage in that it can reliably detect vanB-type VRE phenotypes, which are difficult to detect by commercially available susceptibility testing systems and automated susceptibility assays such as the MicroScan Rapid (Dade MicroScan Inc., West Sacramento, Calif.) and VITEK GPS-TA (bioMerieux Vitek Inc., Hazelwood, Mo.) tests.
In summary, the PCR method is an attractive alternative to culture and phenotypic methods for surveillance of VRE in hospitals with heavy workloads. Even though the PCR that uses presumptive growth of VRE on a screening medium is not as rapid as a PCR using direct specimens, it has a shorter turnaround time than the phenotypic method. It is a cost-effective method, particularly when the prevalence of VRE is low. It also provides isolates for strain typing without any additional costs.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
This work was supported by the Hamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Microbiology Section, Hamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program, Hamilton Health Sciences Corporation, General Campus, 237 Barton St. East, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8L 2X2. Phone: (905) 527-4322, ext. 6182. Fax: (905) 577-8027. E-mail: Jayaratn{at}FHS.McMaster.CA.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
1993.
Nosocomial enterococci resistant to vancomycin United States, 1989-1993.
Morbid. Mortal. Weekly Rep.
42:597-599[Medline].
|
| 2. | Dutka-Malen, S., S. Evers, and P. Courvalin. 1995. Detection of glycopeptide resistance genotypes and identification to the species level of clinically relevant enterococci by PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol. 33:24-27[Abstract]. |
| 3. |
Greisen, K.,
M. Loeffelholz,
A. Purohit, and D. Leong.
1994.
PCR primers and probes for the 16S rRNA gene of most species of pathogenic bacteria, including bacteria found in cerebrospinal fluid.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
32:335-351 |
| 4. | Huycke, M. M., D. F. Sahm, and M. S. Gilmore. 1998. Multiple-drug-resistant enterococci: the nature of the problem and an agenda for the future. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 4:239-249[Medline]. |
| 5. | Narmdari, H., and V. DelVecchio. 1998. Application of PCR for the characterization of enterococci. Clin. Microbiol. Newsl. 20:91-94. |
| 6. |
Ofner-Agastin, M. E.,
J. Conly,
S. Paton,
A. Kureishi,
L. Nicolle,
M. Mulvey,
W. Johnson,
L. Johnston, and The Canadian Hospital Epidemiology Committee.
1997.
Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) in Canada results of the Canadian Nosocomial Infection Surveillance Program 1996 VRE point prevalence surveillance project.
Can. J. Infect. Dis.
8:73-78.
|
| 7. | Satake, S., N. Clark, D. Rinland, F. S. Nolte, and F. C. Tenover. 1997. Detection of vancomycin-resistant enterococci in fecal samples by PCR. J. Clin. Microbiol. 35:2325-2330[Abstract]. |
| 8. | Stosor, V., M. A. Tornatore, G. A. Noskin, F. C. Tenover, and L. R. Peterson. 1998. Improved recovery of vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) using a hot-start polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay for the detection of vanA and vanB from rectal swabs, abstr. C-366, p. 192. In Abstracts of the 98th General Meeting of the American Society for Microbiology. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C. |
This article has been cited by other articles:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»