Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, September 2000, p. 3407-3412, Vol. 38, No. 9
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Rapid Extraction from and Direct Identification in Clinical
Samples of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococci Using the
PCR
Richard I.
Jaffe,1,*
Janae D.
Lane,1
Stephen V.
Albury,1 and
Debra M.
Niemeyer2
Clinical Investigation Facility, David Grant
Medical Center, Travis AFB, California
94535-1800,1 and USAF Force
Protection Battlelab, Lackland AFB, Texas
78236-52552
Received 25 April 2000/Returned for modification 27 May
2000/Accepted 16 June 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Methicillin-resistant staphylococci (MRS) are one of the most
common causes of nosocomial infections and bacteremia. Standard bacterial identification and susceptibility testing frequently require
as long as 72 h to report results, and there may be
difficulty in rapidly and accurately identifying methicillin
resistance. The use of the PCR is a rapid and simple process for the
amplification of target DNA sequences, which can be used to
identify and test bacteria for antimicrobial resistance. However,
many sample preparation methods are unsuitable for PCR utilization in
the clinical laboratory because they either are not cost-effective,
take too long to perform, or do not provide a satisfactory DNA template
for PCR. Our goal was to provide same-day results to facilitate rapid
diagnosis and therapy. In this report, we describe a rapid method for
extraction of bacterial DNA directly from blood culture bottles that
gave quality DNA for PCR in as little as 20 min. We compared this
extraction method to the standard QIAGEN method for turnaround time
(TAT), cost, purity, and use of template in PCR. Specific
identification of MRS was determined using intragenic primer sets for
bacterial and Staphylococcus 16S rRNA and mecA
gene sequences. The PCR primer sets were validated with 416 isolates of
staphylococci, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus
aureus (n = 106), methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (n = 134), and coagulase-negative
Staphylococcus (n = 176). The total supply
cost of our extraction method and PCR was $2.15 per sample with a
result TAT of less than 4 h. The methods described herein
represent a rapid and accurate DNA extraction and PCR-based
identification system, which makes the system an ideal candidate for
use under austere field conditions and one that may have utility in the
clinical laboratory.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Since the introduction of
methicillin, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
(MRSA) and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci
(MRCoNS) have spread worldwide and have become an important cause of
nosocomial infections (10, 11, 21). Nationally, 5 to 10% of
all hospitalized patients in a given facility will be colonized or
infected with MRSA (24). There has been a steady increase in
the prevalence of MRSA isolated in U.S. hospitals over the years, and
now approximately 25% of all S. aureus nosocomial isolates
are methicillin resistant (8). Also, as many as 60 to 90%
of all clinical CoNS isolates are resistant to methicillin (2,
42). These increased rates of methicillin resistance worldwide
make it crucial for clinical laboratories to have rapid, accurate,
and simple methods for the identification and confirmation of MRSA and MRCoNS.
MRSA produce a novel penicillin binding protein (PBP) (PBP 2a or PBP
2') in addition to the usual PBPs (18, 46). This is the
primary mechanism of staphylococcal methicillin resistance and is
referred to as intrinsic resistance (38). PBP 2a has a low
affinity for
-lactam antibiotics and is thought to function in their
presence to confer resistance to the bacteria. Resistance can also be
heterogeneous, because factors other than PBP 2a influence the degree
to which it is expressed (6, 17, 28). In addition, bacterial
strains with low-level resistance to methicillin may produce large
amounts of
-lactamase and therefore not exhibit intrinsic
resistance. MRCoNS also become resistant by acquisition of the PBP
2a-encoding gene, mecA (9, 44). mecA
is a chromosomally derived gene that has been cloned and sequenced
(5, 25, 39). It has a very high level of homology in MRSA
and MRCoNS and is absent from methicillin-susceptible staphylococcal
isolates (32, 40). Additionally, the mecA gene is
virtually identical in all staphylococcal strains and thus is a useful
molecular marker of methicillin resistance (3, 48).
Automated systems have excellent specificity but often lack
sensitivity in detecting methicillin-resistant staphylococci
(MRS), particularly coagulase-negative strains (8).
Currently, methods for identification of methicillin resistance in
isolates from clinical laboratories include agar dilution, disk
diffusion, and broth dilution. These methods detect phenotypic
expression rather than the presence of the mecA gene, and
their results depend on numerous variables, specially requiring
isolated colonies from an overnight subculture on solid agar from the
positive blood culture, sputum, or urine sample (8). For
CoNS, some laboratories have reported a false-susceptibility rate of
16% using the VITEK system when compared to disk diffusion
testing (7). Furthermore, when antibiotic susceptibility
testing of S. aureus clinical isolates (blood, sputum, or
urine) is performed in conjunction with the oxacillin screening plate,
it can take up to 3 days for confirmatory results from different
clinical samples.
The use of PCR for the detection of mecA has been previously
described (4, 7, 15, 19, 20, 23, 27, 37, 41, 45, 47, 48,
51); many different techniques have been utilized to
generate template DNA from various sources for PCR (M. Dion, C. Menard,
F. J. Picard, L. Gernier, P. H. Roy, M. Ouellette, and
M. G. Bergeron, Abstr. 99th Gen. Meet. Am. Soc. Microbiol., abstr.
C-481, 1999). In the clinical laboratory, additional steps may be
required for cell lysis or removal of potential inhibitors from some
clinical specimens. These steps can add to the cost per test, increase
sample processing time, and eliminate the formation of a general
extraction procedure that can be easily and rapidly applied to identify
a variety of microorganisms in a variety of clinical samples (blood,
sputum, or urine). Many procedures are too time-consuming to allow easy
assimilation into the clinical microbiology laboratory. Also, these PCR
methods require a pure sample from a subculture, delaying result
turnaround time (TAT) and necessitating the use of special media.
This paper describes a simple and rapid extraction method for DNA from
gram-positive cocci as well as a simple PCR procedure for the direct
identification of MRS. The entire procedure can be performed with
results available within 4 h following the detection of positive
blood culture bottles or urine samples. In this report, we compared our
method for TAT, cost, and use of template in PCR to the QIAGEN (Santa
Clarita, Calif.) DNA purification kit, which provides a reliable method
to purify DNA for PCR (33). The total supply cost (including
PCR amplification of the target) was as little as $2.15 per sample. A
complete clinical sample processing procedure is also described. The
purpose of this study was to determine whether direct identification of
MRS from blood cultures, utilizing PCR, would agree with standard
identification methods. A cost analysis was done to show that PCR
detection optimized for use in the clinical laboratory could be
cost-effective compared to standard methods.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Bacterial strains.
To develop the rapid DNA extraction
method, five S. aureus strains were used:
methicillin-resistant clinical isolates 450M, N315, Col, and BMSI as
well as methicillin-sensitive clinical isolate RN4220 (31).
To test the limiting dilution of the new extraction method, an
Escherichia coli isolate was used. To test the specificity
and sensitivity of our PCR primer sets, a total of 416 clinical
isolates of Staphylococcus were studied; all were obtained
from Kaiser Permanente Reference Laboratories (Berkeley, Calif.).
Additionally, 10 clinical isolates, including Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus pyogenes, Pseudomonas
aeruginosa, and E. coli, obtained from the clinical
laboratory at Davis Grant USAF Medical Center were also tested. Each
sample was from a positive blood culture bottle, and staphylococcal
species were identified by Gram stain, tube coagulase test, and use of
the MicroScan system (Dade Behring, Deerfield, Ill.) and oxacillin
screening plates. Staphylococcal isolates were placed into one of four
groups: MRSA, methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA),
oxacillin-resistant CoNS (OxRCoNS), and oxacillin-sensitive CoNS
(OxSCoNS). Upon receipt of the blood culture bottle by our institution,
a subculture of each sample was performed on sheep blood agar plates
and incubated 37°C overnight. An inoculum (104 CFU/ml) of
each sample was mixed with 5 ml of anticoagulated blood and then
inoculated into a new blood culture bottle that was incubated in a
BACTEC 9240 system (Becton Dickinson, Sparks, Md.) for 14 to 18 h.
Blood samples that did not contain bacteria were also inoculated into
blood culture bottles and incubated as well for negative controls. All
samples inoculated with bacteria were positive after 14 to 18 h in
the BACTEC 9240 system. The next day, 0.2-ml aliquots of the positive
and negative blood culture bottles were used for DNA extraction.
Rapid extraction method.
S. aureus strains 450M, N315,
Col, and BMSI (31) were used to compare the methods of DNA
extractions. The S. aureus strains were taken from an
overnight subculture and resuspended into 1 ml of 1×
phosphate-buffered saline. One milliliter containing 109
CFU of bacterial cells per ml was centrifuged at 7,500 × g for 3 min. This was the starting point for both of the
extraction procedures.
(i) QIAGEN.
The first procedure used was a
modification of a QIAamp blood and tissue kit (QIAGEN). The lysostaphin
incubation required for lysis of gram-positive bacteria and proteinase
K enzyme incubation was reduced from 30 to 10 min. The QIAamp procedure
was then followed per the manufacturer's instructions. Briefly,
109 CFU of bacterial cells per ml and white blood cells
were lysed with lysis buffer, and proteinase K enzyme and ethanol were
added to the resultant lysate. The total solution was added to a QIAamp spin column, which absorbs the DNA onto the QIAamp silica membrane during the brief centrifugation steps. The column was washed to remove
any residual contaminants, and the bound DNA was eluted in concentrated
form with water or Tris-EDTA (TE) buffer.
(ii) Bead beating with Chelex (BB+C).
Bacterial cells
(109 CFU/ml) were mixed with 0.5 ml of EDTA-anticoagulated
blood, 1 ml of urine, or 500 µl of 10 mM TE buffer (pH 8.4). For
whole blood, the sample was mixed, centrifuged for 3 min at 10,000 rpm,
and washed consecutively with 1 ml of 4% glacial acetic acid, 1 ml of
1× PBS, and 500 µl of 10 mM TE buffer (pH 8.4). After the addition
of the TE buffer, 1 g of 0.1-mm-diameter glass beads (Biospec
Products, Inc., Bartlesville, Okla.) and ~0.25 g of Chelex-100
(Bio-Rad, Hercules, Calif.) were added to the sample mixture. The
samples were mixed and processed in the bead beater (Biospec Products;
Inc.) at three-quarters speed for 5 min and then boiled for 5 min. The
samples were then centrifuged for 5 min at 10,000 × g,
and the supernatants were removed to clean 1.7-ml Eppendorf tubes. All
DNA samples were measured for concentration using a DNA/RNA calculator
(Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, N.J.).
Lower limiting dilution experiment.
To determine the lower
limits of detection of the target sequences, extracted DNA was diluted
to 1 ng by serial dilutions and PCR was performed. To determine the
lower limit of detection (in CFU per milliliter), dilutions of S. aureus 450M from 1010 to 100 CFU/ml were
extracted by both QIAGEN and BB+C methods and PCR was performed.
Direct amplification of staphylococcus from extracted DNA with
PCR.
The extracted staphylococcal DNA samples were used to PCR
amplify different target sites in the genome (Table
1), to include the S. aureus
mecA gene and staphylococcus and bacterial 16S rRNA genes. For the
whole-blood sample, the wild-type brain-derived neurotrophic factor
(bdnf) gene was also amplified as a positive extraction
control. Life Technologies-Gibco BRL (Gaithersburg, Md.) synthesized
the primers for PCR. One microliter of the extracted DNA (50-ng
minimum) was added to the Ready-To-Go (RTG) PCR beads (Pharmacia
Biotech). When brought to a final volume of 25 µl, the thermocycling
mix contained 10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 9.0), 50 mM KCl, 1.5 mM
MgCl2, a 200 µM concentration of each deoxynucleoside triphosphate, and ~1.5 U of Taq DNA polymerase along with
a 0.5 µM concentration of each primer set. The thermocycling
conditions were as follows: 94°C for 5 min for 1 cycle and then
94°C for 1 min, 57°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 2 min for 35 cycles
on a Progene (Princeton, N.J.) Thermocycler. The reaction was then
incubated for an additional 10 min at 72°C and was maintained at
4°C for up to 48 h. After thermocycling, 5 µl was removed and
subjected to agarose gel electrophoresis to determine the quantity,
quality, purity, and appropriate size of products. The resultant
amplicons were resolved by agarose gel electrophoresis (1.5% agarose)
at 120 V for 30 min and were run along with molecular weight markers (Life Technologies-Gibco BRL). The gel was stained with ethidium bromide, and the amplicons were visualized using a UV light box. All
PCR testing was performed by dedicated personnel in a physical location
distinct from the rest of the laboratory. Contaminant primer controls
were included with the substitution of deionized water for template
DNA. Positive and negative controls were included with each run.
Susceptibility test.
Resistance to methicillin was
determined by automated susceptibility testing using the MicroScan
system for bacterial strains that were identified by PCR as
mecA negative (and MRSA by MicroScan) or mecA
positive (but MSSA by MicroScan). MICs of methicillin were also
determined by broth microdilution methods recommended by the National
Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (29) with minor
modifications. The final inoculum was adjusted to 108
CFU/ml in Mueller-Hinton broth (Difco Laboratories, Detroit, Mich.) to
increase the detection of methicillin resistance. Bacteria were
incubated at 35°C for 24 h before MICs were determined. Disk diffusion tests, when used, were performed using 30-µg
amoxicillin-clavulanate disks (Becton Dickinson, Cockeysville, Md.) for
susceptibility and 0.4-U Taxo A disks (Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria,
Calif.) for the identification of Micrococcus species
(13). Next, a bacterial suspension, with turbidity
approximately equal to a 0.5 McFarland standard, of each isolate was
inoculated by being swabbed onto Mueller-Hinton agar and incubated at
35°C for 24 h. If a zone of inhibition was present, the organism
was presumed to not be a Staphylococcus.
-Lactamase
production, when tested, was detected using cefinase disks (Becton Dickinson).
Result TAT measurement and cost-per-test determination.
Result TAT was measured from the time the positive blood culture bottle
was removed from the BACTEC 9240 system for extraction of the DNA to
the resolution of the PCR amplicons by agarose gel electrophoresis and
the final observance of results. Cost per test was calculated by
determining the one-time use of each individual item required to
perform the test, including the supplies and media.
 |
RESULTS |
Rapid extraction method.
Five S. aureus strains
were used to test the BB+C DNA extraction method to generate
sufficient, quality DNA for PCR. Table 2
compares the concentration and purity ranges of the DNA BB+C extraction
method for the five S. aureus strains tested. The median concentration of isolated DNA ranged from 87.3 to 385 ng/µl, and the
median purity based on the 260 nm/280 nm ratio ranged from 0.81 to 1.22 ng/µl. A consistent result with PCR was obtained for all five
S. aureus strains with DNA obtained by the BB+C method. S. aureus 450M had the highest concentration and was used
for comparison with the QIAGEN method. The median concentration of S. aureus 450M using the QIAGEN method was 78.5 ng/µl,
with a purity of 1.04. DNA extracted by the QIAGEN method gave
consistent results in PCR, and the resultant amplicons generated from
each method were separated by agarose gel electrophoresis. These
results are shown in Fig. 1.

View larger version (106K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Agarose gel electrophoresis of genomic DNA extracted by
different methods from S. aureus 450M, amplified with MRSA
primer sets. Lane 1, 100-bp DNA ladder (100 to 15,000 bp and 2,072-bp
fragment) (Life Technologies); lane 2, DNA PCR control from RTG PCR
beads (Pharmacia Biotech) (500 bp); lanes 3 to 5, QIAGEN
method-extracted DNA bacterial culture; lanes 6 to 8, BB+C-extracted
DNA; lanes 9 to 11, previously made amplicons (positive control)
generated from the mecA gene (997 bp); S. aureus
16S rRNA gene (750 bp), and bacterial 16S rRNA gene (292 bp); lanes 12 to 14, no DNA template (negative control) with each primer set. Lanes 3 and 6 contain amplicons PCR generated with the mecA gene
primer set, lanes 4 and 7 contain amplicons PCR generated with the
S. aureus 16S rRNA gene primer set, and lanes 5 and 8 contain amplicons PCR generated with the bacterial 16S rRNA gene primer
set.
|
|
The BB+C and QIAGEN methods were tested for lower limits of detection
of the target sequences. As little as 5 ng of DNA was required to
amplify the target sequences using DNA generated from either method.
The lower limits of detection (in CFU per milliliter) for both methods
were also determined. S. aureus 450M at dilutions of
1010 100 CFU/ml was extracted by both methods,
the DNA was measured, and PCR was performed. The minimum number of
target sequences to be amplified by PCR was 109
CFU/ml when DNA was extracted by both methods. To test if this was
strain specific, S. aureus BMS1 was tested, and it gave
similar results. E. coli ATCC 25922 was also tested;
however, the target sequences from both methods could be amplified at a
lower limit of 103 CFU/ml. To determine the time frame for
the minimum concentration required to test positive in the BACTEC 9240 system, aliquots of anticoagulated whole blood were prepared with
concentrations of S. aureus 450M ranging from
102 to 108 CFU/ml. These spiked samples were
then used to inoculate blood culture bottles, which were incubated in
the BACTEC 9240 system. The time frame required for the blood culture
bottles to test positive was 5.3 h for the 108-CFU/ml
concentration, 10 h for the 106-CFU/ml concentration,
10.1 h for the 104-CFU/ml concentration, and 11.75 h
for the 102-CFU/ml concentration. The bacterial density of
the blood culture bottle when it became positive was between 1.25 × 109 and 4.0 × 109 CFU/ml when the
starting concentration was between 102 and 104
CFU/ml.
The extraction method was tested with different types of
clinical samples. Figure 2 shows that the
S. aureus mecA gene and Staphylococcus and
bacterial 16S rRNA genes were all easily amplified from S. aureus DNA obtained by the BB+C extraction method from different
sample sources: urine (lanes 3 to 5), whole blood (lanes 6 to 8), and
bacterial culture (lanes 9 to 11). The bdnf gene was
amplified from DNA extracted by the BB+C method from whole blood (lane
12). All primer sets were tested for contamination, and no amplicons
were detected after electrophoresis (lanes 13 to 15). As negative
controls, 10 clinical isolates obtained from our clinical laboratory,
including E. faecalis, S. pyogenes, P. aeruginosa, and E. coli, were mixed with blood and
urine and then tested. Only the bacterial 16S rRNA gene target sequence
in each of these samples could be amplified by PCR (data not shown).

View larger version (102K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Agarose gel electrophoresis of S. aureus 450M
genomic DNA extracted from different sample sources by the BB+C method,
amplified with MRSA primer sets. Lane 1, 100-bp DNA ladder (100 to
15,000 bp, and 2,072-bp fragment) (Life Technologies); lane 2, DNA PCR
control from RTG PCR beads (Pharmacia Biotech) (500 bp); lanes 3 to 5, from urine; lanes 6 to 8, from whole blood; lanes 9 to 11, from
bacterial culture; lanes 13 to 15, no DNA template (negative control)
with each primer set. Lanes 3, 6, and 9 contain amplicons PCR generated
with the mecA gene primer set (997 bp); lanes 4, 7, and 10 contain amplicons PCR generated with the S. aureus 16S rRNA
gene primer set (750 bp); lanes 5, 8, and 11 contain amplicons PCR
generated with the bacterial 16S rRNA gene primer set (292 bp); and
lane 12 contains amplicons PCR generated with the bdnf gene
primer set (764 bp).
|
|
Amplification of MRS.
Next we tested for the presence of
mecA and bacterial and staphylococcal 16S rRNA genes in each
of the 416 clinical isolates. Only the expected amplified DNA products
were produced from the bacterial (292-bp) and staphylococcal (750-bp)
16S rRNA primer sets in every sample. An amplified DNA product (997 bp)
was seen in 106 of 106 isolates from the MRSA group and in 2 of 134 isolates from the MSSA group when the mecA primer sets were
used (Table 1). The two discrepant MSSA samples showed an amplified
product (997 bp) upon retesting. To further test for the presence of
phenotypic resistance, two MSSA samples were tested by the broth
microdilution assay. The results showed that the MIC of methicillin for
the two MSSA samples was 8 µg/ml, indicating unequivocally that they did possess methicillin resistance, and that the MIC of oxacillin for
these strains was 8 µg/ml, and therefore they had been falsely classified as MSSA by the oxacillin screening plate.
Detection of mecA gene in CoNS.
The presence of
the mecA gene in 111 OxRCoNS isolates and 65 OxSCoNS
isolates was tested. All strains tested positive for the bacterial and
staphylococcal 16S rRNA genes. The mecA gene (997 bp) was
detected in 97 of 111 OxRCoNS and in 4 of 65 OxSCoNS. Upon retesting
the 14 discrepant OxRCoNS isolates, 10 of 14 OxRCoNS isolates again
showed an amplified product. To further test for the presence of
phenotypic resistance, the four OxRCoNS isolates lacking
mecA were tested by the broth microdilution assay. The results showed that the MIC of methicillin for all four OxRCoNS isolates was 8 µg/ml, indicating that these strains did possess methicillin resistance, and the MIC of oxacillin for these strains was
8 µg/ml. The four OxRCoNS isolates lacking mecA were
also tested for the production of
-lactamase by using cefinase
disks and for susceptibility to amoxicillin-clavulanate and Taxo A by the disk diffusion test. All four OxRCoNS isolates lacking
mecA were positive for the production of
-lactamase and
were susceptible to amoxicillan-clavulanate, while two OxRCoNS isolates
lacking mecA were sensitive to Taxo A, indicating that they
were Micrococcus species.
Upon retesting of the four discrepant mecA-positive OxSCoNS
isolates, two of four of the isolates again showed an amplified product
(997 bp) indicating the presence of the mecA gene. To further test for phenotypic resistance, these two
mecA-positive OxSCoNS isolates were tested by the broth
microdilution assay. The results showed that the MIC of methicillin for
both of the mecA-positive OxSCoNS isolates was 8 µg/ml,
indicating that they were methicillin resistant, and the MIC of
oxacillin for these strains was 8 µg/ml, and therefore they had been
falsely classified as methicillin sensitive. Of the two OxSCoNS
isolates lacking mecA, one was positive by the broth
microdilution method (MICs of methicillin and oxacillin, 8 µg/ml),
indicating that it was methicillin resistant. No further identification
was performed on these two isolates.
 |
DISCUSSION |
We have developed a procedure for rapid extraction of
microorganism DNA directly from select clinical samples for molecular testing in our laboratory. Our mechanical lysis procedure generated DNA
from the bacterial agent directly from the clinical sample within 20 min of sample submission. Significant progress has been made in the
development of commercial extraction kits that can be used for rapid
nucleic acid extraction from microbial cultures for PCR. However,
they require multiple steps (5 to 40) and extended times (15 to 150 min). They may require a pure culture and may be cost-prohibitive for
large numbers of samples (Dion et al., Abstr. 99th Gen. Meet. Am. Soc.
Microbiol.). The QIAGEN procedure for DNA extraction, against
which our preparation method was compared, requires the use of these
lysozyme, lysostaphin, and proteinase K enzymes specifically with
gram-positive organisms (33). The most important component
of an extraction method is the ability to obtain quality DNA for PCR.
Even with the wide range of concentrations from the five S. aureus strains, the DNA was easily amplified by standard PCR and
the target sites selected were readily amplified using a battery of
primer sets that specifically identified MRSA from different sample
sources (Fig. 2). The results were available in less than 4 h,
confirming the identification of the microorganism as well as
determining the presence of antibiotic resistance markers.
Our BB+C method does have one significant limitation. The minimum
amount of organism determined to be necessary for extraction of the DNA
and detection of the target sequences by PCR was 109
CFU/ml. However, when E. coli ATCC 25922 was tested, the
target sequences could be amplified utilizing only 103
CFU/ml. The QIAGEN procedure states that its lower limit of detection is 103 CFU/ml; however, we could not duplicate this with
our S. aureus strain. Nevertheless, our results indicate
that a 104-CFU/ml concentration of bacteria requires a
10.1-h incubation to test positive in the BACTEC 9240 system. In our
experience, once the blood culture bottle becomes positive (bacterial
density, 1.25 × 109 to 4.0 × 109
CFU/ml), we can detect MRS with our system. However, in our clinical microbiology laboratory, the blood culture bottles are monitored continuously but the positives are not worked up until the next morning. When we tested our positive blood culture bottles the next
day, all had more than 109 CFU/ml. Therefore, there will be
a sufficient concentration of bacteria for extraction and detection by
our method.
The cost of the rapid extraction and PCR-based method is
affordable, and setup is readily applicable to the clinical laboratory. Standard identification methods, which include VITEK cards, media, inoculating loops, antibiotic disks, and reagents, can cost more than
$7.00 per sample for confirmation. If it is determined that the
identity of a clinical isolate with a positive blood culture bottle
result needs to be confirmed using the MRS primer set (bacterial and
Staphylococcus 16S rRNA gene and mecA gene), the
cost could be less than that of standard identification. The cost per
test for the RTG tubes is $1.50/tube plus $0.10 for the set of primers, totaling $1.60/PCR for each primer set. If a panel consisting of three primer sets were to be used, then the cost would be
$1.60 × 3 (for three different primer sets for identification),
or $4.80. Adding the cost of the BB+C extraction method
($0.55/extraction) makes the total cost per test $5.35 (Table
3). Technician time can also be
calculated to include exact sample processing time. One sample takes
approximately 30 min for DNA extraction and PCR setup. Electrophoresis
setup is about 10 min. If five samples were to be tested the DNA
extraction and PCR setup time would be under 40 min for all five
samples. Therefore, the reported method was determined to be both time-
and cost-effective compared to standard clinical procedures.
The presence of the mecA gene, as detected by our PCR
procedures, had a 99% agreement with clinical findings of methicillin resistance in the 416 Staphylococcus isolates tested.
Interestingly, during the validation process we determined that there
were two isolates that were classified as MSSA and two isolates
classified as OxSCoNS by the MicroScan system in which we were able to
detect the presence of the mecA gene by PCR. Upon
further testing of these four isolates by broth microdilution, it was
shown that all of these samples were phenotypically methicillin
and oxacillin resistant. There were four additional isolates classified
as OxRCoNS in which we were not able to detect the presence of the
mecA gene, but all of these isolates were positive by broth
microdilution for methicillin and oxacillin resistance (MIC, 8 µg/ml). Further investigation of these four OxRCoNS isolates lacking
mecA revealed that they produced
-lactamase and were all
susceptible to amoxicillin-clavulanate. In addition, one isolate
classified as OxSCoNS also lacked mecA but was broth
microdilution positive. Borderline resistant strains that do not
contain the mecA gene have been hypothesized to result from
modification of normal PBP genes or overproduction of staphylococcal
-lactamase (8, 26, 43). However, the role of
-lactamase overproduction in borderline resistance is less clear,
and no clinical data have suggested that the level of resistance
expressed by borderline resistant strains lacking mecA
leads to treatment failure (8). Further testing
revealed that two of the four OxRCoNS isolates lacking
mecA were species of the genus Micrococcus, which
is known to be more closely related to Arthrobacter, a
genus of environmental coryneforms, than to Staphylococcus
(7). Therefore, the PCR method did discriminate
between high-level
-lactam (methicillin) resistance by the
presence of the mecA gene in Staphylococcus isolates and related strains that were
-lactamase producers only.
PCR detection of mecA should be considered as the potential
"gold standard" for staphylococcal methicillin resistance. Previous studies have reported discrepancies, noting that some strains lacking
mecA displayed phenotypic resistance to methicillin while others containing mecA showed phenotypic susceptibility
(1, 14, 22, 49). Additionally, mecA
transcriptional activity does not correlate with phenotypic methicillin
resistance (31). Until new sets of recommendations are
established, a combination of methods should be used routinely in
detecting MRSA and OxRCoNS (8, 12, 35, 48, 49).
A rapid PCR method that utilizes capillary air thermal cyclers to
improve TAT has been published (7, 19, 20).
Air-thermocycling-real-time PCR holds great promise as a rapid
diagnostic tool, but instrumentation cost may be prohibitive, being 10 times that of regular thermocyclers. We further investigated this
approach and recently presented research data utilizing this new
technology with our rapid extraction method (D. M. Niemeyer, G. Veltri, and R. I. Jaffe, Abstr. 39th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob.
Agents Chemother., abstr. 876, 1999). Our procedure took less than 40 min from DNA extraction to confirmation with our method specific for
methicillin resistance and had a 100% correlation with methicillin
sensitivity testing and mecA determination by standard PCR.
The sensitivity of PCR coupled with the speed of our procedure can
assist the provider in making a prudent and timely selection of
chemotherapeutic agents. This approach for identifying antibiotic resistance markers has great potential for augmenting standard microbiological methods. The primary value of the rapid testing approach is that it will work well where standard microbiological testing capabilities are limited but agent identification is critical (remote, deployed medical facilities), although it may find good utility in clinical laboratories in the near future as these
laboratories incorporate PCR into their normal work flow. We evaluated
a field PCR laboratory set up in both a deployable medical system at an army reserve training facility in Dublin, Calif., and an air force field hospital (30; D. M. Niemeyer, M. Dempsey, W. Hamilton, J. McAvy, J. Benjack, J. Ruiz, L. Lim,
and K. Lohman, Abstr. 39th Intersci. Conf. Antimicrob. Agents
Chemother., abstr. 1560, 1999). Additionally, to continue
evaluation of real-time PCR use, an air force laboratory has been set
up in Southwest Asia (D. M. Niemeyer, M. Corkern, W. J. Barnes, D. White, W. Johnson, M. Dempsey, and K. Lohman, Abstr. 100th
Gen. Meet. Am. Soc. Microbiol., 2000). In many military field
hospitals, microbiological testing capabilities are limited and may not
include standard culture and identification capabilities. As such,
routine samples are shipped to regional or stateside reference
laboratories for testing, which increases result TAT to a week or
longer. PCR would provide select on-site preliminary test capabilities
to assist the health care provider in patient treatment decisions under
work conditions that normally may not afford standard microbiological testing.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Arlene Reiss, Maya Murashima, Charlene Crigger, and Judy
Fusco for their help in obtaining the clinical samples from Kaiser
Permenente. We also thank James W. Smith, Michael Climo, and Jennifer
Brustrom for critical review of the manuscript.
This work was performed under U.S. Air Force Surgeon General-approved
Clinical Investigation FDG1998021E.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Present address:
Commonwealth Biotechnologies, Inc., 601 Biotech Dr., Richmond, VA
23235. Phone: (800) 735-9224. Fax: (800) 648-2641. E-mail:
rjaffe{at}cbi-biotech.com.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Araj, G. F.,
R. S. Talhouk,
C. J. Simaan, and M. J. Maasad.
1997.
Discrepancies between mecA PCR and conventional tests used for detection of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents
11:47-52.
|
| 2.
|
Archer, G. A., and M. W. Climo.
1994.
Antimicrobial susceptibility of coagulase-negative staphylococci.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
38:2231-2237[Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Archer, G. A., and D. M. Niemeyer.
1994.
Origin and evolution of DNA associated with resistance to methicillin in staphylococci.
TEM
2:343-348.
|
| 4.
|
Barski, P.,
L. Piechowicz,
J. Galinski, and J. Kur.
1996.
Rapid assay for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using multiplex PCR.
Mol. Cell. Probes
10:471-475[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Beck, W. D.,
B. Berger-Bachi, and F. H. Kayser.
1986.
Additional DNA in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and molecular cloning mecA-specific DNA.
J. Bacteriol.
165:373-378[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 6.
|
Berger-Bachi, B.,
L. Barberis-Maino,
A. Strassle, and F. H. Kayser.
1989.
FemA, a host-mediated factor essential for methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: molecular cloning and characterization.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
219:263-269[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Carroll, K. C.,
R. B. Leonard,
P. L. Newcomb-Gayman, and D. R. Hillyard.
1996.
Rapid detection of the Staphylococcus mecA gene from BACTEC blood culture bottles by the polymerase chain reaction.
Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.
106:600-605.
|
| 8.
|
Chambers, H. F.
1997.
Methicillin resistance in staphylococci: molecular and biochemical basis and clinical implications.
Clin. Microbiol. Rev.
10:781-791[Abstract].
|
| 9.
|
Chambers, H. F.
1987.
Coagulase-negative staphylococci resistant to -lactam antibiotics in vivo produce penicillin-binding protein 2a.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
31:1919-1924[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Crossley, K.,
D. Loesch,
B. Landesman,
K. Mead,
M. Chern, and R. Strate.
1979.
An outbreak of infection caused by strains of Staphylococcus aureus resistant to methicillin and aminoglycosides. I. Clinical studies.
J. Infect. Dis.
139:273-279[Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Doebbling, B. N.
1995.
The epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection and colonization.
J. Chemother.
7(Suppl. 3):99-103.
|
| 12.
|
Farrell, D. J.
1997.
The reliability of Microscan conventional and rapid panels to identify Staphylococcus aureus and detect methicillin resistance: an evaluation using the tube coagulase test and mecA PCR.
Pathology
29:406-410[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Forbes, B. A.,
D. F. Sahm, and A. S. Weisfield.
1994.
Staphylococcus, Micrococcus, and similar organisms, p. 603-618.
In
B. A. Forbes, D. F. Sahm, and A. S. Weissfeld (ed.), Bailey & Scott's diagnostic microbiology, 10th ed. Mosby, Inc., St. Louis, Mo.
|
| 14.
|
Frebourg, N. B.,
D. Nouet,
L. Lemee,
E. Martin, and J. F. Lemeland.
1998.
Comparison of ATB Staph, Rapid ATB Staph, Vitek, and E-test methods for detection of oxacillin heteroresistance in staphylococci possessing mecA.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:52-57[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Geha, D. J.,
J. R. Uhl,
C. A. Gustaferro, and D. H. Persing.
1994.
Multiplex PCR for identification of methicillin-resistant staphylococci in the clinical laboratory.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
32:1768-1772[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 16.
|
GIBCO-BRL.
1994.
Life Technologies-Gibco Bethesda Research lab catalogue, item 10198-018.
GIBCO-BRL, Gaithersburg, Md.
|
| 17.
|
Hartman, B. J., and A. Tomasz.
1986.
Expression of methicillin resistance in heterogeneous strains of Staphylococcus aureus.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
29:85-92[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 18.
|
Hartman, B. J., and A. Tomasz.
1984.
A low-affinity penicillin-binding protein associated with -lactam resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and molecular cloning of mec-specific DNA.
J. Bacteriol.
158:513-516[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 19.
|
Kearns, A. M.,
P. R. Seiders,
J. Wheeler,
R. Freeman, and M. Steward.
1999.
Rapid detection of methicillin-resistant staphylococci by multiplex PCR.
J. Hosp. Infect.
43:33-37[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Kitagawa, Y.,
M. Ueda,
N. Ando,
M. Endo,
K. Ishibiki,
Y. Kobayashi,
T. Arai, and M. Kitajima.
1996.
Rapid diagnosis of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia by nested polymerase chain reaction.
Ann. Surg.
224:665-671[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Klimek, J. J.,
F. J. Marsik,
R. C. Bartlett,
B. Weir,
P. Shea, and R. Quintilliani.
1976.
Clinical epidemiologic and bacteriologic observations of an outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus at a large community hospital.
Am. J. Med.
61:340-345[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Kohner, P.,
J. Uhl,
C. Kolbert,
D. Persing, and F. Cockerill, III.
1999.
Comparison of susceptibility testing methods with mecA gene analysis for determining oxacillin (methicillin) resistance in clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococcus species.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
37:2952-2961[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Kolbert, C. P.,
J. Arruda,
P. Varga-Delmore,
X. Zheng,
M. Lewis,
J. Kolberg, and D. H. Persing.
1998.
Branched-DNA assay for detection of the mecA gene in oxacillin-resistant and oxacillin-sensitive staphylococci.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:2640-2644[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Martin, M. A.
1994.
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: the persistent, resistant nosocomial pathogen, p. 170-191.
In
J. S. Remington, and M. N. Schwartz (ed.), Current clinical topics in infectious disease. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Boston, Mass.
|
| 25.
|
Matsuhashi, M.,
M. D. Song,
F. Ishino,
M. Wachi,
M. Doi,
M. Inoue,
K. Ubukata,
N. Yamashita, and M. Konno.
1986.
Molecular cloning of the gene of a penicillin-binding protein supposed to cause high resistance to -lactam antibiotics in Staphylococcus aureus.
J. Bacteriol.
167:975-980[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
McDougal, L. K., and C. Thornsberry.
1986.
The role of -lactamase in staphylococcal resistance to penicillinase-resistant penicillin and cephalosporin.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
23:832-839[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Murakami, K.,
W. Minamide,
K. Wada,
E. Nakamura,
H. Teraoka, and S. Watanabe.
1991.
Identification of methicillin-resistant strains of staphylococci by polymerase chain reaction.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
29:2240-2244[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Murakami, K., and A. Tomasz.
1989.
Involvement of multiple genetic determinants in high-level methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus.
J. Bacteriol.
171:874-879[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards.
1997.
Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically, 4th ed. Approved standard M7-A4.
National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, Wayne, Pa.
|
| 30.
|
Niemeyer, D. M.,
R. I. Jaffe, and L. B. Wiggins.
2000.
Feasibility determination for use of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in the USAF air transportable hospital (ATH) field environment: lessons learned.
Mil. Med.
165(11):11.
|
| 31.
|
Niemeyer, D. M.,
M. J. Pucci,
J. A. Thanassi,
V. K. Sharma, and G. L. Archer.
1996.
Role of mecA transcriptional regulation in the phenotypic expression of methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus.
J. Bacteriol.
178:5464-5471[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Predari, S. C.,
M. Ligozzi, and R. Fontana.
1991.
Genotypic identification of methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci by polymerase chain reaction.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
35:2568-2573[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Qiagen.
1996.
QIAamp blood and tissue DNA extraction handbook.
Qiagen, Santa Clarita, Calif.
|
| 34.
|
Relman, D. A.,
T. M. Schmidt,
R. P. MacDermont, and S. Falkow.
1992.
Identification of the uncultured bacillus of Whipple's disease.
N. Engl. J. Med.
323:1573-1580[Abstract].
|
| 35.
|
Ribeiro, J.,
F. D. Vieira,
T. King,
J. B. D'Arezzo, and J. M. Boyce.
1999.
Misclassification of susceptible strains of Staphylococcus aureus as methicillin-resistant S. aureus by rapid automated susceptibility testing system.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
37:1619-1620[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Ryffel, C.,
F. H. Kayser, and B. Berger-Bachi.
1992.
Correlation between regulation of mecA transcription and expression of methicillin resistance in staphylococci.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
36:25-31[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Salisbury, S. M.,
L. M. Sabatini, and C. A. Spiegal.
1997.
Identification of methicillin-resistant staphylococci by multiplex polymerase chain reaction.
Am. J. Clin. Pathol.
107:368-373[Medline].
|
| 38.
|
Seligman, S. J.
1966.
Penicillinase-negative variants of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Nature (London)
209:994-996[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Song, M. D.,
M. Wachi,
M. Doi,
F. Ishino, and M. Matsuhashi.
1987.
Evolution of an inducible penicillin-target protein in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus by gene fusion.
FEBS Lett.
94:137-138.
|
| 40.
|
Suzuki, E.,
K. Hiramatsu, and T. Yokota.
1992.
Survey of methicillin-resistant clinical strains of coagulase-negative staphylococci for mecA gene distribution.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
36:429-434[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Tokue, Y.,
S. Shoji,
K. Satoh,
A. Watanabe, and M. Motomiya.
1992.
Comparison of a polymerase chain reaction assay and a conventional microbiologic method for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
36:6-9[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 42.
|
Tomasz, A.
1994.
Multiple antibiotic resistant pathogenic bacteria.
N. Engl. J. Med.
330:1247-1251[Free Full Text].
|
| 43.
|
Tomasz, A.,
H. B. Drugeon,
H. M. de Lencastre,
D. Jabes,
L. McDougal, and J. Bille.
1989.
New mechanism for methicillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus: clinical isolates that lack the PBP 2a gene and contain normal penicillin-binding proteins with modified penicillin-binding capacity.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
33:1869-1874[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 44.
|
Ubukata, K.,
N. Yamashita, and M. Konno.
1985.
Occurrence of a -lactam-inducible penicillin-binding protein in methicillin-resistant (heteroresistant) staphylococci.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
27:851-857.
|
| 45.
|
Unal, S.,
J. Hoskins,
J. E. Flokowitsch,
C. Y. Wu,
D. A. Preston, and P. L. Skatrud.
1992.
Detection of methicillin-resistant staphylococci by using the polymerase chain reaction.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
30:1685-1691[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Utsui, Y., and T. Yokota.
1985.
Role of an altered penicillin-binding protein in methicillin- and cephem-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.
Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
28:851-857[Free Full Text].
|
| 47.
|
Vannuffel, P.,
P. F. Laterre,
M. Bouyer,
J. Gigi,
B. Vandercam,
M. Reynaert, and J. L. Gala.
1998.
Rapid and specific molecular identification of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in endotracheal aspirates from mechanically ventilated patients.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:2366-2368[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 48.
|
Vannuffel, P.,
J. Gigi,
H. Ezzedine,
B. Vandercam,
M. Delmee,
G. Wautters, and J. L. Gala.
1995.
Specific detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus species by multiplex PCR.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
33:2864-2867[Abstract].
|
| 49.
|
Wallet, F.,
M. Roussel-Delvallez, and R. J. Courcol.
1996.
Choice of a routine method for detecting methicillin-resistance in staphylococci.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
37:901-909[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 50.
|
York, M. K.,
L. Gibbs,
F. Chehab, and G. F. Brooks.
1996.
Comparison of PCR detection of mecA with standard susceptibility testing methods to determine methicillin resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
34:249-253[Abstract].
|
| 51.
|
Zambardi, G.,
M. E. Reverdy,
S. Bland,
M. Bes,
J. Freney, and J. Fleurette.
1994.
Laboratory diagnosis of oxacillin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus by a multiplex-polymerase chain reaction assay.
Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.
19:25-31[CrossRef][Medline].
|
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, September 2000, p. 3407-3412, Vol. 38, No. 9
0095-1137/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Jain, A., Agarwal, A., Verma, R. K.
(2008). Cefoxitin disc diffusion test for detection of meticillin-resistant staphylococci. J Med Microbiol
57: 957-961
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Spence, R. P., Wright, V., Ala-Aldeen, D. A. A., Turner, D. P., Wooldridge, K. G., James, R.
(2008). Validation of Virulence and Epidemiology DNA Microarray for Identification and Characterization of Staphylococcus aureus Isolates. J. Clin. Microbiol.
46: 1620-1627
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Duggirala, A., Kenchappa, P., Sharma, S., Peeters, J. K., Ahmed, N., Garg, P., Das, T., Hasnain, S. E.
(2007). High-Resolution Genome Profiling Differentiated Staphylococcus epidermidis Isolated from Patients with Ocular Infections and Normal Individuals. IOVS
48: 3239-3245
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Mishra, U K, Jacobs, S E, Doyle, L W, Garland, S M
(2006). Newer approaches to the diagnosis of early onset neonatal sepsis.. Arch. Dis. Child. Fetal Neonatal Ed.
91: F208-F212
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Tsao, S.-M., Hsu, C.-C., Yin, M.-C.
(2006). Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection in diabetic mice enhanced inflammation and coagulation.. J Med Microbiol
55: 379-385
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Makhoul, I. R., Smolkin, T., Sujov, P., Kassis, I., Tamir, A., Shalginov, R., Sprecher, H.
(2005). PCR-Based Diagnosis of Neonatal Staphylococcal Bacteremias. J. Clin. Microbiol.
43: 4823-4825
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Adams, D. N.
(2005). Shortcut Method for Extraction of Staphylococcus aureus DNA from Blood Cultures and Conventional Cultures for Use in Real-Time PCR Assays. J. Clin. Microbiol.
43: 2932-2933
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Fujita, S.-I., Senda, Y., Iwagami, T., Hashimoto, T.
(2005). Rapid Identification of Staphylococcal Strains from Positive-Testing Blood Culture Bottles by Internal Transcribed Spacer PCR Followed by Microchip Gel Electrophoresis. J. Clin. Microbiol.
43: 1149-1157
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Zhang, K., Sparling, J., Chow, B. L., Elsayed, S., Hussain, Z., Church, D. L., Gregson, D. B., Louie, T., Conly, J. M.
(2004). New Quadriplex PCR Assay for Detection of Methicillin and Mupirocin Resistance and Simultaneous Discrimination of Staphylococcus aureus from Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci. J. Clin. Microbiol.
42: 4947-4955
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Jain, A., Agarwal, J., Bansal, S.
(2004). Prevalence of methicillin-resistant, coagulase-negative staphylococci in neonatal intensive care units: findings from a tertiary care hospital in India. J Med Microbiol
53: 941-944
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Lapierre, P., Huletsky, A., Fortin, V., Picard, F. J., Roy, P. H., Ouellette, M., Bergeron, M. G.
(2003). Real-Time PCR Assay for Detection of Fluoroquinolone Resistance Associated with grlA Mutations in Staphylococcus aureus. J. Clin. Microbiol.
41: 3246-3251
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Paju, S., Bernstein, J. M., Haase, E. M., Scannapieco, F. A.
(2003). Molecular analysis of bacterial flora associated with chronically inflamed maxillary sinuses. J Med Microbiol
52: 591-597
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Louie, L., Goodfellow, J., Mathieu, P., Glatt, A., Louie, M., Simor, A. E.
(2002). Rapid Detection of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococci from Blood Culture Bottles by Using a Multiplex PCR Assay. J. Clin. Microbiol.
40: 2786-2790
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Maes, N., Magdalena, J., Rottiers, S., De Gheldre, Y., Struelens, M. J.
(2002). Evaluation of a Triplex PCR Assay To Discriminate Staphylococcus aureus from Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci and Determine Methicillin Resistance from Blood Cultures. J. Clin. Microbiol.
40: 1514-1517
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Martinez, F., Chandler, L. J., Reisner, B. S., Woods, G. L.
(2001). Evaluation of the Vitek Card GPS105 and VTK-RO7.01 Software for Detection of Oxacillin Resistance in Clinically Relevant Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci. J. Clin. Microbiol.
39: 3733-3735
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Mason, W. J., Blevins, J. S., Beenken, K., Wibowo, N., Ojha, N., Smeltzer, M. S.
(2001). Multiplex PCR Protocol for the Diagnosis of Staphylococcal Infection. J. Clin. Microbiol.
39: 3332-3338
[Abstract]
[Full Text]