» Articles » PMID: 11015358

Multicenter Evaluation of Epidemiological Typing of Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Strains by Repetitive-element PCR Analysis. The European Study Group on Epidemiological Markers of the ESCMID

Abstract

Rapid and efficient epidemiologic typing systems would be useful to monitor transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) at both local and interregional levels. To evaluate the intralaboratory performance and interlaboratory reproducibility of three recently developed repeat-element PCR (rep-PCR) methods for the typing of MRSA, 50 MRSA strains characterized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) (SmaI) analysis and epidemiological data were blindly typed by inter-IS256, 16S-23S ribosomal DNA (rDNA), and MP3 PCR in 12 laboratories in eight countries using standard reagents and protocols. Performance of typing was defined by reproducibility (R), discriminatory power (D), and agreement with PFGE analysis. Interlaboratory reproducibility of pattern and type classification was assessed visually and using gel analysis software. Each typing method showed a different performance level in each center. In the center performing best with each method, inter-IS256 PCR typing achieved R = 100% and D = 100%; 16S-23S rDNA PCR, R = 100% and D = 82%; and MP3 PCR, R = 80% and D = 83%. Concordance between rep-PCR type and PFGE type ranged by center: 70 to 90% for inter-IS256 PCR, 44 to 57% for 16S-23S rDNA PCR, and 53 to 54% for MP3 PCR analysis. In conclusion, the performance of inter-IS256 PCR typing was similar to that of PFGE analysis in some but not all centers, whereas other rep-PCR protocols showed lower discrimination and intralaboratory reproducibility. None of these assays, however, was sufficiently reproducible for interlaboratory exchange of data.

Citing Articles

Taking hospital pathogen surveillance to the next level.

Werner G, Couto N, Feil E, Novais A, Hegstad K, Howden B Microb Genom. 2023; 9(4).

PMID: 37099616 PMC: 10210943. DOI: 10.1099/mgen.0.001008.


Molecular typing of from different sources by RAPD-PCR analysis.

Zare S, Derakhshandeh A, Haghkhah M, Naziri Z, Broujeni A Heliyon. 2019; 5(8):e02231.

PMID: 31517083 PMC: 6728420. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02231.


Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Molecular Characterization, Evolution, and Epidemiology.

Lakhundi S, Zhang K Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018; 31(4).

PMID: 30209034 PMC: 6148192. DOI: 10.1128/CMR.00020-18.


Perinatal Streptococcus agalactiae Epidemiology and Surveillance Targets.

Furfaro L, Chang B, Payne M Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018; 31(4).

PMID: 30111577 PMC: 6148196. DOI: 10.1128/CMR.00049-18.


Pre-parturition staphylococcal mastitis in primiparous replacement goats: persistence over lactation and sources of infection.

Jacome I, Sousa F, De Leon C, Spricigo D, Saraiva M, Givisiez P Vet Res. 2014; 45:115.

PMID: 25487513 PMC: 4302595. DOI: 10.1186/s13567-014-0115-6.


References
1.
Deplano A, Vaneechoutte M, Verschraegen G, Struelens M . Typing of Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis strains by PCR analysis of inter-IS256 spacer length polymorphisms. J Clin Microbiol. 1997; 35(10):2580-7. PMC: 230014. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.35.10.2580-2587.1997. View

2.
Cotter L, Daly M, Greer P, Cryan B, Fanning S . Motif-dependent DNA analysis of a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus collection. Br J Biomed Sci. 1999; 55(2):99-106. View

3.
Deplano A, Struelens M . Nosocomial infections caused by staphylococci. Methods Mol Med. 2011; 15:431-68. DOI: 10.1385/0-89603-498-4:431. View

4.
Tenover F, Arbeit R, Archer G, Biddle J, Byrne S, Goering R . Comparison of traditional and molecular methods of typing isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol. 1994; 32(2):407-15. PMC: 263045. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.32.2.407-415.1994. View

5.
Grundmann H, Schneider C, Tichy H, Simon R, Klare I, Hartung D . Automated laser fluorescence analysis of randomly amplified polymorphic DNA: a rapid method for investigating nosocomial transmission of Acinetobacter baumannii. J Med Microbiol. 1995; 43(6):446-51. DOI: 10.1099/00222615-43-6-446. View