Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 15, Number 12—December 2009

Novel Lineage of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Hong Kong

Luca Guardabassi, Margie O’Donoghue, Arshnee Moodley, Jeff Ho, and Maureen BoostComments to Author 
Author affiliations: University of Copenhagen, Frederiksberg C, Denmark (L. Guardabassi, A. Moodley); The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, People’s Republic of China (M. O’Donoghue, J. Ho, M. Boost)

Main Article

Table 1

Characteristics of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from pig carcasses in Hong Kong, 2008*

Isolate Sampling date Resistance pattern spa type SCCmec type PFGE pattern† aroE allele MLST type
K1 Feb 22 3 t899 IVb A1 3 ST9
G29 Mar 11 4 t899 IVb A2 3 ST9‡
55 Mar 27 1 t899 IVb A1 3 ST9‡
56 1 t899 V B1 3 ST9
57 1 t899 V B1 3 ST9‡
61 1 t899 V B1 3 ST9‡
54 1 t899 V B2 3 ST9‡
B40 Apr 15 1 t899 IVb A1 3 ST9‡
B46 1 t899 IVb A1 3 ST9‡
B50 1 t899 IVb A1 3 ST9‡
B51 1 t899 IVb A1 3 ST9‡
B52 1 t899 IVb A1 3 ST9‡
B22 1 t899 V B1 3 ST9‡
B39 1 t899 IVb A3 3 ST9‡
B37 2 t899 IVb A2 3 ST9‡
B36 2 t899 IVb A4 3 ST9‡

*SCC, staphylococcal chromosome cassette; PFGE, pulsed-field gel electrophoresis; MLST, multilocus sequence typing. Resistance patterns: 1, oxacillin, penicillin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, gentamicin, clindamycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin, cotrimoxazole; 2, oxacillin, penicillin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, clindamycin , erythromycin, ciprofloxacin, fusidic acid; 3, oxacillin, penicillin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, gentamicin, clindamycin, erythromycin, ciprofloxacin, cotrimoxazole, fusidic acid, 4, oxacillin, penicillin, tetracycline, chloramphenicol, clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, cotrimoxazole, fusidic acid.
†Closely or possibly related PFGE patterns according to the Tenover criteria (8) are designated by the same letter and different numbers.
‡ST9 was predicted on the basis of PFGE and spa and aroE typing.

Main Article

  1. De Neeling  AJ, van den Broek  MJM, Spalburg  EC, van Santen-Verheuvel  MG, Dam-Deisz  WDC, Boshuizen  HC, High prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in pigs. Vet Microbiol. 2007;122:36672. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. van Loo  I, Huijsdens  X, Tiemersma  E, de Neeling  A, van de Sande-Bruinsma  N, Beaujean  D, Emergence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus of animal origin in humans. Emerg Infect Dis. 2007;13:18349.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial disk susceptibility tests, 9th edition, vol. 26, no. 1. Approved standard M2-A9. Wayne (PA): The Institute; 2006.
  4. Prevost  G, Jaulhac  B, Piemont  V. DNA fingerprinting by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis is more effective than ribotyping in distinguishing amongst methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates. J Clin Microbiol. 1992;30:96773.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Zhang  K, McClure  JA, Elsayed  S, Louie  T, Conly  JM. Novel multiplex PCR assay for characterization and concomitant subtyping of staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec types I to V in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol. 2005;43:502633. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Harmsen  D, Claus  H, Witte  W, Rothganger  J, Claus  H, Turnwald  D, Typing of methicillin- resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a university hospital setting by using novel software for spa repeat determination and database management. J Clin Microbiol. 2003;41:54428. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Enright  MC, Day  NP, Davies  CE, Peacock  SJ, Spratt  BG. Multilocus sequence typing for characterisation of methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible clones of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38:100815.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Tenover  FC, Arbeit  RD, Goering  RV, Mickelsen  PA, Murray  BE, Persing  DH, Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing. J Clin Microbiol. 1995;33:22339.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Armand-Lefevre  L, Ruimy  R, Andremont  A. Clonal comparison of Staphylococcus aureus isolates from healthy pig farmers, human controls, and pigs. Emerg Infect Dis. 2005;11:7114.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bagcigil  FA, Moodley  A, Baptiste  KE, Jensen  VF, Guardabassi  L. Occurrence, species distribution and clonality of methicillin- and erythromycin-resistant staphylococci in the nasal cavity of domestic animals. Vet Microbiol. 2007;121:30715. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Kehrenberg  C, Cuny  C, Strommenger  B, Schwarz  S, Witte  W. Methicillin-resistant and -susceptible Staphylococcus aureus of clonal lineages ST398 and ST9 from swine carry the multidrug resistance gene cfr. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:77981. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu  Y, Wang  H, Du  N, Shen  E, Chen  H, Niu  J, Molecular evidence for spread of two major methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clones with a unique geographic distribution in Chinese hospitals. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:5128. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Van Duijkeren  E, Ikawaty  R, Broekhuizen-Stins  MJ, Jansen  MD, Spalburg  EC, de Neeling  AJ, Transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains between different kinds of pig farms. Vet Microbiol. 2008;126:3839. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Wulf  MW, Sørum  M, van Nes  A, Skov  R, Melchers  WJ, Klaassen  CH, Prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among veterinarians: an international study. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2008;14:2934. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Strommenger  B, Braulke  C, Heuck  D, Schmidt  C, Pasemann  B, Nübel  U, spa typing of Staphylococcus aureus as a frontline tool in epidemiological typing. J Clin Microbiol. 2008;46:57481. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar

Main Article

Page created: December 09, 2010
Page updated: December 09, 2010
Page reviewed: December 09, 2010
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.