1887

Abstract

Screening and pre-emptive isolation of at-risk patients are important aspects of the Danish approach to the prevention of meticillin-resistant (MRSA) infection, but screening with conventional culture can take up to 3 days for results to become available with attendant costs and disadvantages of prolonged isolation. We sought to evaluate the accuracy, time to availability of results and potential economic benefits of two next-generation MRSA screening assays, Xpert MRSA Gen 3 (GX MRSA) and BD MAX MRSA , in a setting of a consolidated laboratory serving a number of hospitals with a low prevalence of MRSA and using enrichment culture as a reference method. Four hundred and forty-seven screening samples together with 49 previously positive MRSA samples were evaluated. Xpert MRSA Gen 3 demonstrated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 88.2, 97.9, 62.5 and 99.5 %, respectively, and for BD MAX MRSA , they were 88.2, 97.4, 57.7 and 99.5 %, respectively. Hands-on time was 8.8 and 21.6 min, respectively, for the Xpert MRSA Gen 3 and BD MAX MRSA PCR assays when five samples were handled simultaneously. The mean laboratory turnaround time was 2.9 (1–6) hours for the Xpert MRSA Gen 3 assay, 6.5 (2–46) hours for BD MAX MRSA and 49.6 (42–122) hours for enriched culture. Despite laboratory costs being higher for the rapid PCR assays, when the costs of isolation are taken into account, the assays offer the potential for significant cost savings.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000411
2017-01-01
2019-12-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jmm/66/1/90.html?itemId=/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000411&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Hetem DJ, Bootsma MC, Troelstra A, Bonten MJ. Transmissibility of livestock-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Emerg Infect Dis 2013;19:1797–1802 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. García-Álvarez L, Holden MT, Lindsay H, Webb CR, Brown DF et al. Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with a novel mecA homologue in human and bovine populations in the UK and Denmark: a descriptive study. Lancet Infect Dis 2011;11:595–603 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Lepainteur M, Delattre S, Cozza S, Lawrence C, Roux AL et al. Comparative evaluation of two PCR-based methods for detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): Xpert MRSA Gen 3 and BD-Max MRSA XT. J Clin Microbiol 2015;53:1955–1958 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Widen R, Healer V, Silbert S. Laboratory evaluation of the BD MAX MRSA assay. J Clin Microbiol 2014;52:2686–2688 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Huletsky A, Giroux R, Rossbach V, Gagnon M, Vaillancourt M et al. New real-time PCR assay for rapid detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus directly from specimens containing a mixture of staphylococci. J Clin Microbiol 2004;42:1875–1884[PubMed][CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Böcher S, Middendorf B, Westh H, Mellmann A, Becker K et al. Semi-selective broth improves screening for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010;65:717–720 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ekenberg C, Boye K, Schønning K, Westh H, Lisby G. Detection of mecC methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with a semi-selective enrichment broth. J Antimicrob Chemother 2014;69:2864 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Jensen MB, Olsen KE, Nielsen XC, Hoegh AM, Dessau RB et al. Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile: real-time PCR detection of toxin genes in faecal samples is more sensitive compared to toxigenic culture. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2015;34:727–736 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bartels MD, Boye K, Rohde SM, Larsen AR, Torfs H et al. A common variant of staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec type IVa in isolates from Copenhagen, Denmark, is not detected by the BD GeneOhm methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus assay. J Clin Microbiol 2009;47:1524–1527 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Lee S, Park YJ, Park KG, Jekarl DW, Chae H et al. Comparative evaluation of three chromogenic media combined with broth enrichment and the real-time PCR-based Xpert MRSA assay for screening of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in nasal swabs. Ann Lab Med 2013;33:255–260 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Blanc DS, Basset P, Nahimana-Tessemo I, Jaton K, Greub G et al. High proportion of wrongly identified methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus carriers by use of a rapid commercial PCR assay due to presence of staphylococcal cassette chromosome element lacking the mecA gene. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:722–724 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Hombach M, Pfyffer GE, Roos M, Lucke K. Detection of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in specimens from various body sites: performance characteristics of the BD GeneOhm MRSA assay, the Xpert MRSA assay, and broth-enriched culture in an area with a low prevalence of MRSA infections. J Clin Microbiol 2010;48:3882–3887 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Arbefeville SS, Zhang K, Kroeger JS, Howard WJ, Diekema DJ et al. Prevalence and genetic relatedness of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus isolates detected by the Xpert MRSA nasal assay. J Clin Microbiol 2011;49:2996–2999 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Abad C, Fearday A, Safdar N. Adverse effects of isolation in hospitalised patients: a systematic review. J Hosp Infect 2010;76:97–102 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Barratt RL, Shaban R, Moyle W. Patient experience of source isolation: lessons for clinical practice. Contemp Nurse 2011;39:180–193 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Hübner C, Hübner NO, Wegner C, Flessa S. Impact of different diagnostic technologies for MRSA admission screening in hospitals – a decision tree analysis. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2015;4:50 [CrossRef][PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000411
Loading
/content/journal/jmm/10.1099/jmm.0.000411
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error