Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About JCM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Bacteriology

Phenotypic and Genomic Variation among Staphylococcus epidermidis Strains Infecting Joint Prostheses

Jacques-Olivier Galdbart, Anne Morvan, Nicole Desplaces, Nevine el Solh
Jacques-Olivier Galdbart
Unité des Staphylocoques, National Reference Center for Staphylococci, Institut Pasteur, 72724 Paris Cedex 15,
Service de Microbiologie, Hôpital Beaujon, A.P.-H.P., 92100 Clichy,and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Anne Morvan
Unité des Staphylocoques, National Reference Center for Staphylococci, Institut Pasteur, 72724 Paris Cedex 15,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nicole Desplaces
Service de Biologie, Hôpital de la Croix-Saint-Simon, 75020 Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nevine el Solh
Unité des Staphylocoques, National Reference Center for Staphylococci, Institut Pasteur, 72724 Paris Cedex 15,
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.37.5.1306-1312.1999
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

We studied the SmaI and SstII macrorestriction patterns of 54 Staphylococcus epidermidisstrains isolated from 14 patients infected following the implantation of joint prostheses. Multiple strains from pus and infected tissue specimens of each patient were selected on the basis of different colony morphologies and drug resistance patterns. The same criteria were used to select 23 S. epidermidis strains from hand swabs of eight healthy individuals. For 10 of the 14 patients, all the intrapatient strains appeared to be closely or possibly related, whereas related strains were detected in the skin flora of only one of the eight healthy individuals. This observation suggests that, in most cases, the patients were infected by a single S. epidermidis clone which subsequently underwent rearrangements that yielded derivatives with divergent phenotypes and, occasionally, divergent macrorestriction patterns. The four patients whose specimens contained unrelated S. epidermidisstrains were probably infected with several polyclonal strains.

Infection is one of the most devastating complications of prosthetic joint surgery (3, 12, 14, 15, 17, 27, 33). Staphylococcus epidermidis, which can adhere to implants, has increasingly been identified as a cause of such infections (6, 16, 21, 23, 24, 26, 35). S. epidermidis is a normal commensal organism of the skin which may contaminate specimens during collection, and it is therefore difficult to assess the clinical significance of its detection, particularly when the bacterial colonies obtained have diverse aspects and drug resistance phenotypes. Detection of gram-positive cocci by direct inspection and/or repeated isolation of the same mixtures of strains from a series of specimens from the same patient provides good evidence of infection causality (17, 19, 36). The presence in pus and tissue specimens of multiple S. epidermidisstrains, frequent in infections following implantation of joint prostheses (17), may be due either to the genomic instability of a single infectious clone or to an infection caused by a polyclonal mixture of strains such as the mixture of strains found in the skin flora. To examine these two possibilities, we compared the genomes of the various phenotypically distinct S. epidermidis strains detected in pus and tissue specimens from 14 patients with chronic prosthetic joint infections. Diverse S. epidermidis colonies isolated from the skin flora of eight healthy individuals were used for comparative analysis of the intraindividual colonies that were selected on the basis of their different colony morphologies and drug resistance phenotypes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients and healthy individuals.The 14 patients included in this study were infected following the implantation of joint prostheses (see Table 1). Joint replacements were carried out in diverse hospitals, and there was no epidemiological link between the patients. The files of all patients except patients B and N were consulted. The 12 patients whose files were available had pain without fever. The delay between surgery and pain was not regularly registered in the files; therefore, we report (see Table 1) the delay between the implantation of the prosthesis and its replacement (3 to 84 months). The replacement was not necessarily done immediately after the first signs of infection. Five of the 12 patients (patients A, E, I, L, and P) had abscesses, which had fistulized in patients A, L, and P, and 6 patients (patients E, F, I, L, O, and P) presented with edema. Bacteriological samples were obtained at the time of intraoperative assessment and surgery for excisional arthroplasty. No antibiotic was administered to any patient for at least 1 week before joint surgery. Patients whose infected specimens yielded only S. epidermidis were included in this study.

Hand skin swabs were collected from healthy individuals including (i) six surgeons working in the same operating room in a Parisian hospital, but a hospital that was not one of those in which the patients of our study were hospitalized, and (ii) two individuals who did not work in a hospital (see Table 2).

Bacterial strains and plasmids.A total of 82 S. epidermidis strains originating from 14 infected patients (54 strains from infected specimens and 5 strains from cutaneous samples of patient P) and from 8 healthy individuals (23 strains) were studied (see Tables 1 and 2, respectively). The infected specimens and the skin swabs were cultured on sheep blood agar. After at least 48 h of incubation at 37°C, the species of the colonies that were isolated from each sample and that had different morphologies (size, color which varied from white to grey, shape and outline, presence or absence of hemolytic activity, rough or smooth aspect) was determined as described previously (8), and the colonies were tested with the ID32 Staph system (BioMérieux, Marcy-l’Etoile, France). Patients whose infected specimens contained only S. epidermidiscolonies were included in this study. The drug resistance pattern was determined for each different S. epidermidis colony isolated from the specimens of each patient. The strains that were distinguishable by at least one drug resistance marker were studied independently. Similarly, the S. epidermidis colonies isolated from skin flora were selected on the basis of their distinct morphologies and drug resistance patterns. Bacterial suspensions in brain heart infusion containing 30% glycerol were stored at 80°C before analysis.

Plasmid pBA2 (18) was used as a probe for ribotype determination. It consists of pBR322 carrying a 2.3-kbHindIII insert from Bacillus subtilis which encodes 16S rRNA.

Susceptibility to antimicrobial agents.The pattern of resistance to antimicrobial agents was determined by the disk diffusion method (4). The markers tested were those which enabled us to detect the drug resistance phenotypes described to date among staphylococci. Commercially available disks loaded with the following antibiotics were used: penicillin G, oxacillin, spectinomycin, streptomycin, kanamycin, neomycin, gentamicin, tobramycin, chloramphenicol, erythromycin, lincomycin, trimethoprim, sulfonamide, tetracycline, minocycline, pefloxacin, rifampin, fusidic acid, fosfomycin, and vancomycin (Diagnostics Pasteur, Marne-la-Coquette, France) and mupirocin (Mast Diagnostics, Mast Group Ltd., Merseyside, United Kingdom). Additional disks prepared in our laboratory contained 20 μg of pristinamycin IIA, 40 μg of pristinamycin IB, 0.2 μmol of cadmium acetate, 0.2 μmol of sodium arsenate, 0.2 μmol of mercuric nitrate, 200 μg of ethidium bromide, 200 μg of acriflavine, 200 μg of propamidine isethionate, or 10 μg of cetyltrimethylammonium bromide.

Selective Mueller-Hinton agar media containing 4 μg of oxacillin per ml, 0.12 IU of penicillin per ml, 5 μg of erythromycin per ml, 3 μg of tetracycline per ml, or 20 μg of gentamicin per ml were used to screen for variants exhibiting distinct drug resistance patterns in the subcultures of strain 94351 (see Table 1).

Ribotype determination.Cellular DNA was extracted, cleaved with HindIII and EcoRI (Pharmacia Biotech, Uppsala, Sweden) separately, electrophoresed, transferred onto Hybond N+ nylon membranes (Amersham International), and tested for hybridization under stringent conditions with pBA2 radiolabeled with [α-32P]dTCP (110 TBq/mmol) as described elsewhere (7, 8).

The sizes of the bands constituting the hybridization patterns (HPs) were introduced into our database (5, 7). Each of these HPs was compared with each of the EcoRI HPs andHindIII HPs previously obtained for validly classified staphylococci. Similarity was evaluated according to the Dice coefficient (11). The strains that had HPs that were indistinguishable from those detected previously could immediately be assigned to a species. For each new HP, as reported previously (5), the percent similarity with each EcoRI orHindIII HP in the database was calculated. An isolate exhibiting a new HP can be assigned to a known taxon if the highest percentages of similarity obtained are clustered within a single taxon.

Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis of macrorestriction fragments and comparative analysis of banding patterns.The protocol used for the determination of SmaI or SstII restriction patterns was described previously (10). Concatameric bacteriophage lambda DNA molecules (48.5 kb; Bio-Rad) and the SmaI fragments of the cellular DNA fromStaphylococcus aureus NCTC8325 were used as size standards. Macrorestriction fingerprints were compared visually and were scanned with GelCompar software (Applied Maths, Kortrijk, Belgium). A similarity matrix was created by using the band-based Dice similarity coefficient (11). The unweighted pair-group method with average linkages was used to cluster the strains on the basis of the patterns obtained with each of the two enzymes used.

The SmaI or SstII patterns of the isolates from the same patient or healthy individual were compared visually, in pairs, by using an enlarged photograph of the same gel. The strains were clustered according to the following criteria proposed by Tenover et al. (28): (i) Strains were grouped in the same major genotype if their patterns differed by no more than three bands (these strains were considered to be closely related and monoclonal); (ii) if the number of band differences between patterns was between four and six, the strains were scored as possibly related but were nevertheless classified into distinct genotypes to discriminate them clearly from the unambiguously closely related strains; and (iii) differences between patterns involving at least seven bands indicated different or unrelated strains. Major genotypes are designated by capital letters or arabic numerals according to the enzyme used,SmaI or SstII, respectively (see Table 1). The strains having indistinguishable patterns were classified within the same subtype. SmaI subtypes are designated by letters with number suffixes, and SstII subtypes are designated by numbers with letter suffixes. If the dendrograms revealed clusters that included strains from different patients with percentages of similarity of at least 80, the patterns of the strains grouped in the same cluster were compared visually on the same gel. Those strains whose patterns differed by no more than three macrorestriction fragments were assigned to the same genotype.

RESULTS

Identification to the species level.Fifty-one of the 54 coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated from the infected specimens from patients were assigned to S. epidermidis by the ID32 Staph system. Analysis of the hybridization patterns with pBA2 enabled us to assign to S. epidermidis three strains, strains 95160, 96388, and 96390 (Table1) not classified by the ID32 Staph system.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Relevant characteristics of the S. epidermidisstrains isolated from infected patients

The ID32 Staph system was used to identify the S. epidermidis strains isolated from the flora of patient P (Table 1) and the healthy individuals (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Relevant characteristics of the 23 S. epidermidis strains isolated from the cutaneous flora of eight healthy individuals

Drug resistance phenotype.The intrapatient strains had in common 1 to 14 markers and were distinguishable by 1 to 10 additional markers (Table 1). Among the strains from healthy individuals, the intraindividual strains had in common one to three resistance markers and differed by 1 to 13 additional markers (Table2).

Analysis of the macrorestriction patterns. (i) Comparison of theSmaI and SstII patterns of patient strains isolated from infected specimens.The 54 isolates of S. epidermidis tested (Table 1) gave a total of 30 differentSmaI patterns and 29 different SstII patterns. Each SmaI profile included 12 to 17 fragments (Fig.1), and each SstII profile included 12 to 21 fragments (data not shown).

Fig. 1.
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

Classification and schematic representation of theSmaI patterns of the S. epidermidis strains isolated from 14 patients (patients A to F, H, I, K and P) and of the two variants of 94351, Rep1 and Rep2, obtained by subculture.

The strains of each patient were clustered according to the similarities of the SmaI or SstII patterns. The clustering into genotypes of all intrapatient strains except strains 94304, 94305, and 94306, all of which were isolated from patient E, was the same for both enzymes (Table 1). On the basis of the SmaI patterns, these three strains were clustered into the same genotype. However, the SstII pattern of strain 94304 differed from those of strains 94305 and 94306 by fiveSstII fragments, suggesting that strain 94304 is in a separate genotype. Despite their distribution into two SstII genotypes, the three strains from patient E can be considered possibly related. S. epidermidis strains isolated from the infected samples from 8 of the 14 patients studied were monoclonal (Table 1; Fig. 1, patients A, C, D, H, L, M, O, and P), and their drug resistance patterns differed by one to nine markers. The six strains from patient F had five resistance markers in common but were distinguishable by one to eight additional markers and were possibly related since the differences between the SmaI or SstII patterns did not exceed six fragments. For patient N, strains 96408 and 96409, which differed from each other by only one drug resistance marker, had the same macrorestriction patterns with both enzymes; strain 96412 differed from strains 96408 and 96409 by seven and eight markers, respectively, and by more than seven SmaI andSstII bands. The different strains from each of the three patients B, I, and K appeared to be unrelated.

Surprisingly, the strains from patients E and L clustered in the same SmaI genotype, whereas the SstII patterns of the same strains differed by more than seven bands. Although patients E and L underwent prosthesis replacement in the same hospital, the interventions were 2 years apart and the first prostheses were implanted in different hospitals without any detectable link between the patients.

Dendrograms were constructed on the basis of the similarity of the SmaI or SstII patterns by the method of unweighted pair-group method with average linkages (see Fig.1 for SmaI patterns). For the patterns with no more than three fragment differences, the percent similarities were 90 to 100.

(ii) SmaI profiles of the S. epidermidisstrains isolated from the skin flora of patient P.From patient P’s flora, five strains with distinct phenotypes were distributed into five different SmaI genotypes which did not include any of the three strains isolated from the infected specimens (Table 1; Fig. 1). The three strains isolated from both nares, narR, narL1, and narL2, were possibly related because their SmaI patterns differed by four or five fragments.

(iii) SmaI patterns of the hand flora strains isolated from healthy individuals.Among the samples from the eight healthy individuals, only the hand swab of surgeon t gave monoclonal strains (Table 2). The SmaI patterns of strains t4 and t8 differed by only one SmaI fragment, whereas the pattern of the third strain (strain t5) from the same surgeon differed by at least eight fragments. For each of the seven other healthy individuals, the intraindividual colonies were considered unrelated, with at least seven SmaI band differences between the patterns (Table 2). Some of the S. epidermidis strains isolated from different surgeons working in the same operating room were clustered (Table 2), with percentages of similarity above 90 (data not shown). Indeed, theSmaI patterns of strains f1, l3, and j2 from surgeons f, l, and j, respectively, differed from each other by no more than two fragments, and those of strains w3 and m3 from surgeons w and m, respectively, differed from each other by three fragments. The related strains, which were resistant to oxacillin, were detected on the hands of several surgeons and were probably acquired in the hospital.

Analysis of HPs with pBA2 (ribotypes).TheHindIII and EcoRI HPs obtained with pBA2 were determined for the three coagulase-negative staphylococci which could not be classified by the ID32 Staph system (strains 95160, 96388, and 96390) and for a strain representative of each of the genotypes and subtypes of strains from patients (Table 1). For the latter strains, the assignment to S. epidermidis by the ID32 Staph System was confirmed by the comparative analysis of the ribotypes with those of the validly classified staphylococci already in our database.

Some strains considered to be different on the basis of theirSmaI or SstII macrorestriction patterns had the same HPs for both enzymes, as follows: ribotype A for strains 96229, 96389, 96390, 96394, and 96397; ribotype B for strains 96160, 94305, and 96397; and ribotype C for strains 94348, 94351, 96386, and 96388. As reported previously (31), the discriminatory power of ribotyping is not satisfactory for the typing of S. epidermidis strains. Thus, analysis of ribotypes was used only to identify the strains to the species level.

Analysis of the stability of strain 94351 from patient F.Although they were clustered in two genotypes, the six strains from patient F were scored as possibly related (fewer than six band differences). Strain 94351 had the largest number of drug resistance markers and was chosen for use in an evaluation of phenotypic and genomic stability after subculturing in brain heart infusion for 900 generations. Three hundred isolated colonies were studied, and two types of variants were detected: (i) those which had lost their oxacillin resistance, for example, strain Rep2, and (ii) those which had lost their resistance to oxacillin and to macrolides-lincosamides-streptogramin B, for example, Rep1 (Table 1). The loss of oxacillin resistance was associated with the loss of themecA gene (data not shown). Neither of the two variants selected in vitro had a drug resistance pattern that was the same as those of any of the S. epidermidis strains isolated from the specimens from patient F. The SmaI patterns of strains Rep2 and 94351 were indistinguishable. The SmaI pattern of strain Rep1 differed from that of strain 94351 by five restriction fragments and from that of each of 94348, 94349, and 94350 by six fragments. The variant Rep2 strain was more closely related to the strains from patient F than to those from the 13 other patients (Fig. 1), suggesting that this variant was not a contaminant.

DISCUSSION

Variations in phenotypic characteristics, including virulence factors (2, 9, 32, 35) and drug resistance patterns (6, 13, 29), and in plasmid content (22) have often been reported for S. epidermidis strains. The detection of multiple S. epidermidis strains distinguishable by their drug resistance patterns in blood cultures, in pus, and in various other specimens from infected patients does not, however, result exclusively from the instability of phenotypic traits but results also from coinfection with unrelated S. epidermidis strains (1, 17, 20, 30, 34). Indeed, some cases of endocarditis following implantation of a prosthetic valve were recently shown to be attributable to polyclonal S. epidermidis populations (1, 30). Therefore, the detection in samples from the same patient of S. epidermidis strains with different antibiograms does not necessarily indicate contamination of the samples during collection. For the 14 patients in our study, contamination of the specimens by the polyclonal S. epidermidis strains of the skin flora is not likely, not only because most specimens were collected under the rigorously aseptic conditions required for surgery and in a sterile operating field but also because mixtures of phenotypically divergent colonies were detected in at least two specimens from the same patient. The proportion of each S. epidermidis strain in the mixtures could not be ascertained in our study because the drug resistance phenotype of every different strain was taken into consideration when the antibiotic therapy was chosen. This policy has probably contributed to the very high rate of successful eradication of infections following prosthesis replacements in the two hospitals that participated in the study.

The source of the delayed infections for the 14 patients in our study is not known. S. epidermidis of the skin flora or the environment may have been introduced into the operative wound. Alternatively, infection of the prosthesis may have been of blood origin and thus was not acquired during surgery. Collection of theS. epidermidis strains from the skin flora of the patient just before surgery, from the flora of the staff, and from the environment of the operating room would be required to trace the source of infection.

The comparative analysis of drug resistance patterns was insufficient to assess the degree of genomic relatedness of strains because some monoclonal strains in our study gave colonies that differed by up to nine drug resistance markers. Mapping of the genome regions carrying the drug resistance genes in the related strains from each patient would be required to elucidate the genetic changes responsible for the differences in drug resistance markers. When patients are infected with a single clone, the mutation, rearrangement, loss, or transposition of DNA may lead to the diversity of phenotypes (25). Genetic transfers, in particular, conjugation, may also occur when a polyclonal population is present at a single site. When phenotypic variations are not associated with detectable modifications of the macrorestriction profiles, it is likely that drug resistance phenotypic diversity results from divergence in plasmid content, but minor chromosomal modifications cannot be ruled out. This was probably the case for the Rep2 derivative whose SmaI pattern was indistinguishable from that of the parental strain, strain 94351, despite the loss ofmecA, which is usually located in the chromosomes of staphylococci.

In our study, only 4 of the 14 patients appeared to be infected with a polyclonal population of strains. For the 10 other patients, all the intrapatient strains appeared to be closely or possibly related, despite the substantial diversity of the drug resistance patterns. Thus, for most patients, the multiple S. epidermidisstrains found in the specimens were derivatives of a single clone. Such derivatives may have resulted from changes that occurred in situ during the infection process or may have preexisted in the intraoperative source of infection, which is often the skin flora. However, the latter possibility is not probable because closely related S. epidermidis colonies distinguishable by their morphologies and drug resistance patterns were detected in the skin flora of only one of the eight healthy individuals studied.

In conclusion, it is important to try to identify the largest number of colonies with distinct aspects in deep samples collected from patients whose prostheses are suspected of being infected so that antibiotic therapy can be directed at the most resistant isolates. Failure to eradicate these infections may, in some cases, be due to the failure to detect all the different S. epidermidis variants and clones present at the site of infection.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

We thank C. Tran for secretarial assistance.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 8 September 1998.
    • Returned for modification 21 November 1998.
    • Accepted 21 January 1999.
  • Copyright © 1999 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Archer G. L.
    Polyclonal Staphylococcus endocarditis: response.Clin. Infect. Dis.2519977273
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Baddour L. M.,
    2. Barker L. P.,
    3. Christensen G. D.,
    4. Parisi J. T.,
    5. Simpson W. A.
    Phenotypic variation of Staphylococcus epidermidis in infection of transvenous endocardial pacemaker electrodes.J. Clin. Microbiol.281990676679
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Brause B. D.
    Infections associated with prosthetic joints.Clin. Rheum. Dis.121986523536
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  4. 4.↵
    1. Chabbert Y. A.
    Sensibilité bacterienne aux antibiotiques Bactériologie médicale. Médecine Science Le Minor L., Véron M. 1982 204 212 Flammarion Paris, France
  5. 5.↵
    1. Chesneau O.,
    2. Aubert S.,
    3. Morvan A.,
    4. Guesdon J. L.,
    5. El Solh N.
    Usefulness of the ID32 Staph system and a method based on rRNA gene restriction site polymorphism analysis for species and subspecies identification of staphylococcal clinical isolates.J. Clin. Microbiol.30199223462352
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Christensen G. D.,
    2. Baddour L. M.,
    3. Madison B. M.,
    4. Parisi J. T.,
    5. Abraham S. N.,
    6. Hasty D. L.,
    7. Lowrance J. H.,
    8. Josephs J. A.,
    9. Simpson W. A.
    Colonial morphology of staphylococci on Memphis agar: phase variation of slime production, resistance to β-lactam antibiotics, and virulence.J. Infect. Dis.161199011531169
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. De Buyser M. L.,
    2. Morvan A.,
    3. Aubert S.,
    4. Dilasser F.,
    5. El Solh N.
    Evaluation of a ribosomal RNA gene probe for the identification of species and subspecies within the genus Staphylococcus.J. Gen. Microbiol.1381992889899
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    1. De Buyser M. L.,
    2. Morvan A.,
    3. Grimont F.,
    4. El Solh N.
    Characterization of Staphylococcus species by ribosomal RNA gene restriction patterns.J. Gen. Microbiol.1351989989999
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. Deighton M.,
    2. Pearson S.,
    3. Capstick J.,
    4. Spelman D.,
    5. Borland R.
    Phenotypic variation of Staphylococcus epidermidis isolated from a patient with native valve endocarditis.J. Clin. Microbiol.30199223852390
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Derbise A.,
    2. Dyke K. G. H.,
    3. El Solh N.
    Characterization of a Staphylococcus aureus transposon Tn5405, located within Tn5404 and carrying the aminoglycoside resistance genes, aphA-3 and aadE.Plasmid351996174188
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. 11.↵
    1. Dice L. R.
    Measures of the amount of ecological association between species.Ecology261945297302
    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
  12. 12.↵
    1. Dougherty S. H.
    Pathobiology of infection in prosthetic devices.Rev. Infect. Dis.10198811021117
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  13. 13.↵
    1. Etienne J.,
    2. Renaud F.,
    3. Bes M.,
    4. Brun Y.,
    5. Greenland T. B.,
    6. Freney J.,
    7. Fleurette J.
    Instability of characteristics amongst coagulase-negative staphylococci causing endocarditis.J. Med. Microbiol.321990115122
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Garvin K. L.,
    2. Hanssen A. D.
    Infection after total hip arthroplasty. Past, present, and future.J. Bone Joint Surg.77199515761588
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  15. 15.↵
    1. Gristina A. G.,
    2. Naylor P. T.,
    3. Myrvik Q. N.
    Mechanisms of musculoskeletal sepsis.Orthop. Clin. N. Am.221991363371
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  16. 16.↵
    1. Heilmann C.,
    2. Hussain M.,
    3. Peters G.,
    4. Götz F.
    Evidence for autolysin-mediated primary attachment of Staphylococcus epidermidis to a polystyrene surface.Mol. Microbiol.24199710131024
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  17. 17.↵
    1. Hope P. G.,
    2. Kristinsson K. G.,
    3. Norman P.,
    4. Elson R. A.
    Deep infection of cemented total hip arthroplasties caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci.J. Bone Joint Surg.711989851855
    OpenUrl
  18. 18.↵
    1. Iglesias A.,
    2. Ceglowski P.,
    3. Trautner T. A.
    Plasmid transformation in Bacillus subtilis. Effects of the insertion of Bacillus subtilis rRNA genes into plasmids.Mol. Gen. Genet.1921983149155
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. James P. J.,
    2. Butcher I. A.,
    3. Gardner E. R.,
    4. Hamblen D. L.
    Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis in infection of hip arthroplasties.J. Bone Joint Surg.761994725727
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    1. Khatib R.,
    2. Riederer K. M.,
    3. Clark J. A.,
    4. Khatib S.,
    5. Briski L. E.,
    6. Wilson F. M.
    Coagulase-negative staphylococci in multiple blood cultures: strain relatedness and determinants of same-strain bacteremia.J. Clin. Microbiol.331995816820
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. 21.↵
    1. Kloos W. E.,
    2. Bannerman T. L.
    Update on clinical significance of coagulase-negative staphylococci.Clin. Microbiol. Rev.71994117140
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Ludlam H. A.,
    2. Noble W. C.,
    3. Marples R. R.,
    4. Bayston R.,
    5. Phillips I.
    The epidemiology of peritonitis caused by coagulase-negative staphylococci in continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.J. Med. Microbiol.301989167174
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  23. 23.↵
    1. Mack D.,
    2. Fischer W.,
    3. Krokotsch A.,
    4. Leopold K.,
    5. Hartmann R.,
    6. Egge H.,
    7. Laufs R.
    The intercellular adhesin involved in biofilm accumulation of Staphylococcus epidermidis is a linear β-1,6-linked glucosaminoglycan: purification and structural analysis.J. Bacteriol.1781996175183
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Nilsson M.,
    2. Frykberg L.,
    3. Flock J. I.,
    4. Pei L.,
    5. Lindberg M.,
    6. Guss B.
    A fibrinogen-binding protein of Staphylococcus epidermidis.Infect. Immun.66199826662673
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Paulsen I. T.,
    2. Firth N.,
    3. Skurray R. A.
    Resistance to antimicrobial agents other than β-lactams The staphylococci in human disease. Crossley K. B., Gordon G. L. 1997 175 212 Churchill Livingstone New York, N.Y
  26. 26.↵
    1. Pfaller M.,
    2. Herwaldt L.
    Laboratory, clinical and epidemiological aspect of coagulase-negative staphylococci.Clin. Microbiol. Rev.11988281299
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. Rupp M. E.,
    2. Archer G. L.
    Coagulase-negative staphylococci: pathogens associated with medical progress.Clin. Infect. Dis.191994231243
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  28. 28.↵
    1. Tenover F. C.,
    2. Arbeit R. D.,
    3. Goering R. V.,
    4. Mickelsen P. A.,
    5. Murray B. E.,
    6. Persing D. H.,
    7. Swaminathan B.
    Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing.J. Clin. Microbiol.33199522332239
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Toldos C. M.,
    2. Yagüe G.,
    3. Ortiz G.,
    4. Segovia M.
    Assessment of multiple coagulase-negative staphylococci isolated in blood cultures using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis.Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.161997581586
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  30. 30.↵
    1. van Wijngaerden E.,
    2. Peetermans W. E.,
    3. van Lierde S.,
    4. van Eldere J.
    Polyclonal Staphylococcus endocarditis.Clin. Infect. Dis.2519976971
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  31. 31.↵
    1. Walcher-Salesse S.,
    2. Monzon-Moreno C.,
    3. Aubert S.,
    4. El Solh N.
    An epidemiological assessment of coagulase-negative staphylococci from an intensive care unit.J. Med. Microbiol.361992321331
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Williams P.,
    2. Swift S.,
    3. Modun B.
    Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis-associated peritonitis as a model device-related infection: phenotypic adaptation, the staphylococcal cell envelope and infection.J. Hosp. Infect.3019953543
    OpenUrl
  33. 33.↵
    1. Yamaguchi K.,
    2. Adams R. A.,
    3. Morrey B. F.
    Infection after total elbow arthroplasty.J. Bone Joint Surg.80-A1998481491
    OpenUrlPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Zaidi A. K. M.,
    2. Harrell L. J.,
    3. Rost J. R.,
    4. Reller L. B.
    Assessment of similarity among coagulase-negative staphylococci from sequential blood cultures of neonates and children by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis.J. Infect. Dis.174199610101014
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  35. 35.↵
    1. Ziebuhr W.,
    2. Heilmann C.,
    3. Götz F.,
    4. Meyer P.,
    5. Wilms K.,
    6. Straube E.,
    7. Hacker J.
    Detection of the intercellular adhesion gene cluster (ica) and phase variation in Staphylococcus epidermidis blood culture strains and mucosal isolates.Infect. Immun.651997890896
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. 36.↵
    1. Ziza J. M.,
    2. Desplaces N.,
    3. Léonard P.,
    4. Mamoudy P.
    Infections sur prothèses articulaires.Rev. Méd. Int.181997431s434s
    OpenUrl
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Phenotypic and Genomic Variation among Staphylococcus epidermidis Strains Infecting Joint Prostheses
Jacques-Olivier Galdbart, Anne Morvan, Nicole Desplaces, Nevine el Solh
Journal of Clinical Microbiology May 1999, 37 (5) 1306-1312; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.37.5.1306-1312.1999

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Journal of Clinical Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Phenotypic and Genomic Variation among Staphylococcus epidermidis Strains Infecting Joint Prostheses
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Journal of Clinical Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Phenotypic and Genomic Variation among Staphylococcus epidermidis Strains Infecting Joint Prostheses
Jacques-Olivier Galdbart, Anne Morvan, Nicole Desplaces, Nevine el Solh
Journal of Clinical Microbiology May 1999, 37 (5) 1306-1312; DOI: 10.1128/JCM.37.5.1306-1312.1999
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENT
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Arthroplasty, Replacement
Postoperative Complications
Staphylococcus epidermidis

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About JCM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Board of Editors
  • Editor Conflicts of Interest
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Resources for Clinical Microbiologists
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #JClinMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

 

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0095-1137; Online ISSN: 1098-660X