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 22, Number 6—June 2016

High MICs for Vancomycin and Daptomycin and Complicated Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infections with Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus

Rafael San-JuanComments to Author , Esther Viedma, Fernando Chaves, Antonio Lalueza, Jesús Fortún, Elena Loza, Miquel Pujol, Carmen Ardanuy, Isabel Morales, Marina de Cueto, Elena Resino-Foz, Alejandra Morales-Cartagena, Alicia Rico, María P. Romero, María Ángeles Orellana, Francisco López-Medrano, Mario Fernández-Ruiz, and José María Aguado
Author affiliations: University Hospital–Research Institute 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain (R. San-Juan, E. Viedma, F. Chaves, A. Lalueza, E. Resino-Foz, A. Morales-Cartagena, M.Á. Orellana, F. López-Medrano, M. Fernández-Ruiz, J. María Aguado); Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid (J. Fortún, E. Loza); University Hospital–Bellvitge Institute for Biomedical Research, Barcelona, Spain (M. Pujol, C. Ardanuy); Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Macarena, Seville, Spain (I. Morales, M. de Cueto); Hospital Universitario La Paz, Madrid (A. Rico, M.P. Romero)

Main Article

Table 2

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (E-test) of isolates from patients with methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus catheter-related bloodstream infection with or without complicated bacteremia*

Variable Complicated bacteremia
No, n = 57 Yes, n = 26
MIC, μg/mL
Vancomycin 1.2 ± 0.4† 1.5 ± 0.48†
Oxacillin 0.49 ± 0.27 0.51 ± 0.2
Daptomycin 0.4 ± 0.16† 0.5 ± 0.2†
1.08 ± 0.13
1.05 ± 0.08
Vancomycin MIC >1.5 μg/mL 25 (43.9)† 18 (69.2)†
Daptomycin MIC >0.5 μg/mL 4 (7.0)† 9 (34.6)†
Vancomycin MIC >1.5 μg/mL or daptomycin MIC >0.5 μg/mL 26 (45.6)† 19 (73.1)†
Vancomycin MIC >1.5 μg/mL and daptomycin MIC >0.5 μg/mL 3 (5.3)† 8 (30.8)†

*Values are geometric mean ± SD or no. (%).

Main Article

Page created: May 16, 2016
Page updated: May 16, 2016
Page reviewed: May 16, 2016
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.