Comparison of four methods for detection of teicoplanin resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Volumn 58, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 186-189

  Charlesworth, R ^a   Warner, M ^b   Livermore, D M ^b   Wilson, A Peter R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON HOSPITALS   (United Kingdom)

^b PUBLIC HEALTH ENGLAND   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Agar incorporation; Etest; S. aureus

Indexed keywords

TEICOPLANIN;

AGAR MEDIUM; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; ANTIBIOTIC SENSITIVITY; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL COLONIZATION; BACTERIAL SURVIVAL; BACTERIUM ISOLATE; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CRITICALLY ILL PATIENT; DIFFUSION; HUMAN; INOCULATION; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LABORATORY TEST; METHICILLIN RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; NONHUMAN; RELIABILITY; STAPHYLOCOCCUS INFECTION;

ANTI-BACTERIAL AGENTS; HUMANS; METHICILLIN RESISTANCE; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; STAPHYLOCOCCAL INFECTIONS; STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; TEICOPLANIN;

EID: 33748054772     PISSN: 03057453     EISSN: 14602091     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkl151     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Harding I, MacGowan AP, White LO et al. Teicoplanin therapy for Staphylococcus aureus septicaemia: Relationship between pre-dose serum concentrations and outcome. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000; 45: 835-41.
2. Cepeda JA, Whitehouse T, Cooper B et al. Linezolid versus teicoplanin in the treatment of Gram-positive infections in the critically ill: A randomized, double-blind, multicentre study. J Antimicrob Chemother 2004; 53: 345-55.
3. Whitehouse T, Cepeda JA, Shulman R et al. Pharmacokinetic studies of linezolid and teicoplanin in the critically ill. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 55: 333-40.
4. Cavenaghi LA, Biganzoli E, Danese A et al. Diffusion of teicoplanin and vancomycin in agar. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1992; 15: 253-8.
5. Bernard L, Vaudaux P, Rohner P et al. Comparative analysis and validation of different assays for glycopeptide susceptibility among methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains. J Microbiol Methods 2004; 57: 231-9.
6. Cepeda JA, Whitehouse T, Cooper B et al. Isolation of patients in single rooms or cohorts to reduce spread of MRSA in intensive-care units: prospective two-centre study. Lancet 2005; 365: 295-304.
7. Schito GC, Auckenthaler R, Marchese A et al. European survey of glycopeptide susceptibility in Staphylococcus spp. Clin Microbiol Infect 1999; 5: 547-53.
8. Jones ME, Gesu G, Ortisi G et al. Proficiency of Italian clinical laboratories in detecting reduced glycopeptide susceptibility in Enterococcus and Staphylococcus spp. using routine laboratory methodologies. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002; 8: 101-11.
9. Walsh TR, Bolmstrom A, Qwarnstrom A et al. Evaluation of current methods for detection of staphylococci with reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides. J Clin Microbiol 2001; 39: 2439-44.
10. Johnson AP, Henwood C, Mushtaq S et al. Susceptibility of Gram-positive bacteria from ICU patients in UK hospitals to antimicrobial agents. J Hosp Infect 2003; 54: 179-87.