Comparison of method-specific vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration values and their predictability for treatment outcome of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections.

The objectives of this study were to examine the predictive value of method-specific vancomycin (VAN) minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) results on treatment outcomes of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections. VAN MIC values for MRSA strains were determined using Etest, VITEK-1, MicroScan (MScan) and broth microdilution (BMD), with additional screening for heterogeneous glycopeptide-intermediate S. aureus (hGISA) phenotype. Patients' charts were reviewed for outcome correlation. Performance characteristics of method-specific VAN MICs in predicting outcome were compared. Most (76%) of the 92 strains tested caused pneumonia or bacteraemia. The majority of strains tested (>70%) had a VAN MIC >1mg/L by Etest or MScan compared with 41% by Vitek and 7% by BMD. Agreement between test methods for high versus low MICs (>1mg/L vs. < or = 1mg/L) ranged from 36% to 71%. High versus low VAN MICs by Etest differentiated response of invasive strains to VAN. Performance characteristics (sensitivity/specificity/positive predictive value/negative predictive value) were: Etest, 55/81/89/38%; and Vitek, 56/62/81/32/%, respectively. Eight strains (9%) demonstrated a hGISA phenotype; more yielded high MICs by Etest, MScan and Vitek than BMD (87%, 87% and 75% vs. 50%). In conclusion, VAN MIC testing methods produce highly variable results. The Etest method appears to be relatively more reliable in predicting treatment response and yielded higher MICs for strains with a hGISA phenotype.

[1]  G Sherman,et al.  Inadequate antimicrobial treatment of infections: a risk factor for hospital mortality among critically ill patients. , 1999, Chest.

[2]  S. Boyle-Vavra,et al.  Reversion of the Glycopeptide Resistance Phenotype in Staphylococcus aureus Clinical Isolates , 2000, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[3]  S. Erciş,et al.  Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus heterogeneously resistant to vancomycin in a Turkish university hospital. , 2005, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[4]  Jerome J. Schentag,et al.  Accessory gene regulator group II polymorphism in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is predictive of failure of vancomycin therapy. , 2004, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[5]  F. Tenover,et al.  The rationale for revising the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute vancomycin minimal inhibitory concentration interpretive criteria for Staphylococcus aureus. , 2007, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[6]  G. Eliopoulos,et al.  Relationship of MIC and Bactericidal Activity to Efficacy of Vancomycin for Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia , 2004, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[7]  Nnis System National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2003, issued August 2003. , 2003, American journal of infection control.

[8]  P. Ward,et al.  Clinical features associated with bacteremia due to heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus. , 2004, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[9]  Ronald N. Jones Microbiological features of vancomycin in the 21st century: minimum inhibitory concentration creep, bactericidal/static activity, and applied breakpoints to predict clinical outcomes or detect resistant strains. , 2006, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[10]  Jerome J. Schentag,et al.  Vancomycin treatment failures in Staphylococcus aureus lower respiratory tract infections. , 2000, International journal of antimicrobial agents.

[11]  J. Aeschlimann,et al.  Analysis of Vancomycin Population Susceptibility Profiles, Killing Activity, and Postantibiotic Effect against Vancomycin-Intermediate Staphylococcus aureus , 1999, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[12]  P. Ward,et al.  Treatment outcomes for serious infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with reduced vancomycin susceptibility. , 2004, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[13]  P. Appelbaum Microbiology of antibiotic resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. , 2007, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[14]  A. Wong-Beringer,et al.  High-dose vancomycin therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: efficacy and toxicity. , 2006, Archives of internal medicine.

[15]  D. Calfee,et al.  Community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a meta-analysis of prevalence and risk factors. , 2003, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[16]  J M Hughes,et al.  CDC definitions for nosocomial infections, 1988. , 1988, American journal of infection control.

[17]  A. MacGowan,et al.  A Multicenter Study Evaluating the Current Strategies for Isolating Staphylococcus aureus Strains with Reduced Susceptibility to Glycopeptides , 2006, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[18]  A. MacGowan,et al.  Evaluation of Current Methods for Detection of Staphylococci with Reduced Susceptibility to Glycopeptides , 2001, Journal of Clinical Microbiology.

[19]  Susan K. Johnson,et al.  Comparison of community- and health care-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. , 2003, JAMA.

[20]  Jerome J. Schentag,et al.  The efficacy and safety of linezolid as treatment for Staphylococcus aureus infections in compassionate use patients who are intolerant of, or who have failed to respond to, vancomycin. , 2002, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.