Volume 15, Number 12—December 2009
Dispatch
Novel Lineage of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Hong Kong
Table 1
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.
References
- 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;122:366–72. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;13:1834–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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.
- 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;30:967–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;43:5026–33. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;41:5442–8. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;38:1008–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;33:2233–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;11:711–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;121:307–15. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;53:779–81. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;53:512–8. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;126:383–9. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;14:29–34. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 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;46:574–81. DOIPubMedGoogle Scholar