Advertisement
Research Article

Difference in agr Dysfunction and Reduced Vancomycin Susceptibility between MRSA Bacteremia Involving SCCmec Types IV/IVa and I–III

  • Hee-Chang Jang equal contributor,

    equal contributor Contributed equally to this work with: Hee-Chang Jang, Seung-Ji Kang

    Affiliation: Department of Infectious Diseases, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Seung-Ji Kang equal contributor,

    equal contributor Contributed equally to this work with: Hee-Chang Jang, Seung-Ji Kang

    Affiliation: Department of Infectious Diseases, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Su-Mi Choi,

    Affiliation: Department of Infectious Diseases, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Kyung-Hwa Park,

    Affiliation: Department of Infectious Diseases, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Jong-Hee Shin,

    Affiliation: Department of Laboratory Medicine, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Hyon E. Choy,

    Affiliation: Department of Microbiology, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Sook-In Jung mail,

    sijung@chonnam.ac.kr

    Affiliation: Department of Infectious Diseases, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Hong Bin Kim

    Affiliation: Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

    X
  • Published: November 12, 2012
  • DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049136

Abstract

Background

Dysfunction of agr, with reduced susceptibility or hetero-resistance to vancomycin, is thought to be associated with a worse outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia (MRSAB). However, the difference in agr dysfunction according to the SCCmec type in MRSA infection is undetermined. We compared the prevalence of agr dysfunction, reduced vancomycin susceptibility and the outcomes of SCCmec IV/IVa and I–III MRSAB.

Methods

The study included 307 cases of MRSAB. SCCmec types were determined by multiplex PCR. The clinical and microbiological features and outcomes of 58 SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB were compared with those of 249 SCCmec I–III MRSAB.

Results

Compared with SCCmec I–III MRSAB, SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB was associated with lower rates of agr dysfunction (3% vs. 43%), vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) = 2 µg/mL (3% vs. 15%), and hetero-resistance to vancomycin (0% vs. 8%) (all P<0.05). However, the 30-day and S. aureus-related mortality in patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB were not different from those in patients with SCCmec I–III MRSAB in multivariate analyses (HR 1.168, 95% CI 0.705–1.938; HR 1.025, 95% CI 0.556–1.889).

Conclusions

SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB was associated with lower rates of agr dysfunction and hetero-resistance to vancomycin and a lower vancomycin MIC, compared with SCCmec I–III MRSAB. However, the outcomes of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB did not differ from those of SCCmec I–III MRSAB.

Introduction

Accessory gene regulator (agr) is a global regulator gene of Staphylococcus aureus that controls the expression of major virulence factors, such as cytotoxins, enzymes, and superantigens [1]. Moreover, agr is the main quorum-sensing operon in S. aureus that regulates cell to cell signaling [2], [3], Traditionally, most human S. aureus isolates are considered agr+ and to have agr function; however, S. aureus with diminished or absent δ-hemolysin expression (agr dysfunction), the end-product of the agr system, has recently emerged and become prevalent in methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) [4].

Dysfunction of agr is thought to be associated with decreased susceptibility to vancomycin and vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (VISA)/hetero-VISA [5][7], and some have suggested that agr dysfunction adversely affects the treatment outcomes of MRSA infection [8]. However, the prevalence of agr dysfunction according to the SCCmec type in MRSA infection remains uncertain, although MRSA possessing SCCmec type IV/IVa (SCCmec type IV/IVa MRSA), known as a community-associated MRSA clone, has different antibiotic susceptibility patterns and toxin profiles from MRSA possessing SCCmec types I–III (SCCmec I–III MRSA). Moreover, it is still not known whether the outcomes of bacteremia caused by SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA (SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB) are similar to that caused by SCCmec I–III MRSA (SCCmec I–III MRSAB), because clinical studies have obtained conflicting results [9][14].

This study compared the prevalence of agr dysfunction, hetero-VISA, and the vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB with those of SCCmec I–III MRSAB, and investigated the impact of these factors on the outcomes of MRSA bacteremia.

Patients and Methods

Ethics

This Study was approved by the institutional review board of Chonnam National University Hospital. A waiver of consent was granted given the retrospective nature of the project.

Patients

All patients ≥16 years old with MRSA bacteremia who were treated between January 2005 and December 2008 at two university hospitals and referral center centers, Chonnam National University Hospital (1000 beds; Gwang-ju, Republic of Korea) and Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital (700 beds; Hwasun, Republic of Korea), were included. Cases were identified using computerized records from the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory. Only the first episode of MRSA bacteremia in a patient was included. Demographic and clinical data were collected by reviewing the electronic medical records of the patients.

Microbiological Tests

S. aureus was identified and methicillin resistance was determined using the automated systems Vitek 2 (bioMérieux, Marcy l’Etoile, France) or Microscan (Dade Behring Inc., Deerfield, IL). MICs of vancomycin were determined by Etest (AB BIODISK, Solna, Sweden) using a 0.5 McFarland inoculum on Muller–Hinton agar plates. Modified population analyses for hetero-VISA detection were performed using brain–heart infusion agar (BHIA; BD Diagnostics, Sparks, MD) plates containing various concentrations of vancomycin [15]. ATCC 29213, Mu50 (a VISA strain), and Mu3 (a hetero-VISA strain) were used as controls for Etest and modified population analysis. agr dysfunction was determined by examining δ-hemolysin expression on blood agar plates using S. aureus RN4220, as described previously [6].

Multiplex PCR was performed to determine SCCmec type for MRSA isolates, as described previously [16][19]. Panton–Valentine leukocidin (pvl) genes were detected by PCR, as described previously [20].

Definitions

S. aureus bacteremia was considered to have been hospital-onset if S. aureus was isolated from cultures of blood samples obtained from patients who had been hospitalized for 48 h or longer. Otherwise, S. aureus bacteremia was considered to have been community-onset. S. aureus bacteremia was defined as community-acquired if S. aureus were isolated from cultures of blood samples obtained within 48 h of hospital admission and the patient had no medical history of MRSA infection or colonization. This included no medical history in the past year of dialysis, surgery, hospitalization, admission to a nursing home, skilled nursing facility, or hospice, and no permanent indwelling catheter or medical device that passed through the skin into the body [21]. Otherwise, S. aureus bacteremia was considered to have been health care-acquired.

S. aureus bacteremia was defined as catheter-related if the catheter tip grew more than 15 colonies for S. aureus, or inflammation was present at the insertion site and no alternative source of infection was identified [22]. Infective endocarditis was defined by the modified Duke criteria [23]. Metastatic infection was defined as the presence of microbiological or radiographic evidence of S. aureus infection caused by hematogenous seeding [22]. Persistent bacteremia was defined as consecutive blood cultures positive for 7 or more days despite appropriate antibiotic use for 5 or more days [24]. Mortality was defined as S. aureus-related in the absence of another definite cause of death [24].

Statistical Analyses

Categorical variables were compared using Fisher’s exact test or the Pearson χ2 test as appropriate, and continuous variables were compared using Student’s t-test. Multivariate analyses were performed using the Cox-regression hazard model in the backward stepwise conditional manner. All tests of significance were two-tailed, and P values ≤0.05 were deemed to indicate statistical significance. Statistical analyses of the data were performed using the PASW statistics software (version 18.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL).

Results

SCCmec Type and pvl in MRSA Blood Isolates

We identified 307 cases of first-episode MRSA bacteremia during the study period. The most common SCCmec type was II (67.4%) followed by III (13.4%), IVa (12.4%), and IV (6.5%). Only one SCCmec type IVa isolate carried pvl. The prevalence of agr dysfunction and the MICs of vancomycin were significantly lower in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA than SCCmec I–III MRSA (P≤0.05, each; Table 1). Hetero-VISA was observed only in SCCmec I–III MRSA clones (Table 1). SCCmec type IV/IVa isolates presented lower resistance rates to non-β-lactam antibiotic agents (P≤0.05, each; Table 1).

thumbnail

Table 1. Microbiologic characteristics of 307 MRSA bacteremic isolates according to the SCCmec type.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049136.t001

Clinical Features and Outcome of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB as Compared with SCCmec I–III MRSAB

The clinical features of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB and SCCmec I–III MRSAB are shown in Table 2. SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB was significantly more associated with community-acquired and community-onset infection than SCCmec I–III MRSAB (P≤0.05, each). Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) were significantly more common; however, vascular catheter-related infection was significantly less common in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB compared with SCCmec I–III MRSAB (P≤0.05, each). Metastatic infection was more commonly observed in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB than in SCCmec I–III MRSAB (P≤0.05). However, APACHE II score did not differ statistically between two groups (P = 0.729). The use of glycopeptides as a definitive therapy of MRSAB was more common in SCCmec I–III MRSAB than SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB (P = 0.004).

thumbnail

Table 2. Clinical features of 307 patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB or SCCmec I–III MRSAB.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049136.t002

Outcomes of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB Compared with SCCmec I–III MRSAB

Univariate and multivariate analysis for risk factors associated with 30-day mortality in patients with MRSAB are shown in Table 3.In the univariate analysis, age, cancer, chronic obstructive lung disease, and APACHE II score were all significantly associated with increased mortality; but eradication of infection foci was negatively related to 30-day mortality (P≤0.05, each). Increased vancomycin MIC (2 µg/mL), hetero-VISA, and agr dysfunction were not associated with increased 30-day mortality in the univariate analysis. In the multivariate analysis, cancer and APACHE II scores were independent risk factors for-30 day mortality, and the eradication of infective foci was negatively related to 30-day mortality in patients with MRSAB.

thumbnail

Table 3. Univariate and Multivariate analyses for risk factors associated with 30-day mortality in patients with MRSA bacteremia.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049136.t003

Thirty-day crude and 30-day S. aureus-related mortalities were not significantly different between patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB and those with SCCmec I–III MRSAB (Table 2, Fig. 1).Thirty-day crude and 30-day S. aureus-related mortalities also did not differ between patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB and SCCmec I–III MRSAB in multivariate analyses, despite adjustment of independent risk factors using a Cox-regression model (Fig. 1).

thumbnail

Figure 1. Adjusted 30-day crude and 30-day S. aureus-related mortalities in patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB or SCCmec I–III MRSAB.

A. Adjusted 30-day mortalities in patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB or SCCmec I–III MRSAB by multivariate Cox-regression survival analysis. B. Adjusted 30-day S. aureus-related mortalities in patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB or SCCmec I–III MRSAB by multivariate Cox-regression survival analysis. NOTE. SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB, bacteremia caused by MRSA possessing SCCmec type IV or IVa; SCCmec type I–III MRSAB, bacteremia caused by MRSA possessing SCCmec types I–III.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049136.g001

Discussion

In the present study, we found that SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA were associated with low rates of agr dysfunction, compared with SCCmec I–III MRSA. However, outcomes of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB were not different from those of SCCmec I–III MRSAB.

Although agr dysfunction was suggested as contributing to increased mortality related to S. aureus bacteremia, little is known of the prevalence in CA-MRSA clones possessing SCCmec type IV/IVa as compared with HA-MRSA clones possessing SCCmec type I–III. In our previous study, the frequency of agr dysfunction in MSSA blood isolates was 14% and this rate was significantly lower than that in MRSA isolates [25]. In this study, we found similar results; the prevalence of agr dysfunction was significantly lower in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA than SCCmec I–III MRSA. SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA clones were more similar to MSSA than SCCmec I–III MRSA clones in terms of the prevalence of agr dysfunction.

Previous studies demonstrated a limited vancomycin resistance potential in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA clones [26], [27]. However, recently, a SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA clone with an hetero-VISA or VISA phenotype was described [28][30], suggesting that hetero-VISA is not limited to typical ‘hospital’ clones of S. aureus. Han et al. [31] recently showed that the reduced vancomycin susceptibility was lower in SCCmec IV MRSA blood isolates than SCCmec II MRSA isolates, in concordance with the current study. However, the prevalence of hetero-VISA and agr dysfunction of SCCmec IV MRSA isolates were not directly compared with those of SCCmec II MRSA isolates in that study. In this study, the hetero-VISA phenotype developed only in SCCmec I–III MRSA and vancomycin MICs were significantly lower in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA. Our data suggest that although hetero-VISA or MRSA with vancomycin MIC = 2 µg/mL can be found in all MRSA lineages, their prevalence was still significantly lower in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA.

In this study, SSTI was significantly more common; however, vascular catheter-related infection was significantly less common in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB compared with SCCmec I–III MRSAB. Some investigators have shown that the agr system and α-hemolysin play essential roles in pathogenesis of S. aureus SSTI [32], [33] in animal models. However, these roles have not been evaluated in human diseases. Our observational clinical findings regarding the association between SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA, which expresses agr and α-hemolysin, with SSTI in human disease consistently provide further evidence of the important role of the agr system and α-hemolysin in the pathogenesis of S. aureus SSTI. Although agr positively regulates cytotoxins and enzymes, it negatively regulates the biofilm-producing ability of S. aureus [2], [34] and biofilm-producing ability of agr-dysfunctional MRSA blood isolates are higher compared to agr-functional MRSA blood isolates in our previous study [25]. SCCmec I–III MRSA showing high rate of agr dysfunction was a more common cause of catheter-related infection than SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA in this study. These findings suggest that the higher biofilm-producing ability of agr-dysfunctional MRSA might contribute to catheter-colonization and subsequent catheter-related infections, compared to agr-functional MRSA.

The outcomes of MRSA bacteremia are poorer than those of MSSA bacteremia [35]. However, studies on the outcomes of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB as compared with SCCmec I–III MRSAB show conflicting results. Chen et al. reported that mortalities in patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB were significantly lower in SCCmec I–III MRSAB [9]. However, these results were derived only from selected patients (those with community-onset bacteremia in the emergency department) and used 90-day mortality (instead of the more commonly applied 30-day mortality) as an outcome measure, which can be more affected by underlying conditions than S. aureus bacteremia itself. Note that in another study performed by the same group, the 14- and 30-day mortalities were not significantly different between patients with nosocomial SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB and SCCmec I–III MRSAB [14], as well as data from the current study and those of another group [10][12].

We initially hypothesized that SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB was associated with better outcomes than SCCmec I–III MRSAB because we thought SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA might be associated with lower rates of agr dysfunction and hetero-VISA phenotype and decreased vancomycin MICs than SCCmec I–III MRSAB clones. A recent study suggested that agr dysfunction was associated with higher mortality in MRSA bacteremia [8], and some data show an association between vancomycin MICs and the hetero-VISA phenotype and higher mortality rates [36][38]. However, in this study, the mortality rate in patients with SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB was not different from that in patients with SCCmec I–III MRSAB, even though SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA clones had lower rates of agr dysfunction, hetero-VISA, and lower vancomycin MICs. In this study, agr dysfunction was not associated with increased mortality in MRSA bacteremia, in contrast to a previous report [8]. Neither vancomycin MICs nor the hetero-VISA phenotype was associated with higher mortality rates in this study, in agreement with previous reports [39][46].

Two possible explanations exist for this result. One is that agr dysfunction, vancomycin MICs, and the hetero-VISA phenotype did not themselves adversely influence the outcome of MRSA bacteremia in vivo. The second is that the virulence attenuation caused by agr dysfunction might compromise the adverse influence on mortality of decreased sensitivity to glycopeptides in patients with MRSA bacteremia. Peleg et al. showed that in MRSA with agr dysfunction that had developed increased vancomycin MIC and the hetero-VISA/VISA phenotype, virulence toward Galleria mellonella was attenuated [47]. This latter hypothesis might be supported by the findings of other clinical studies: the paradoxical relationship between increased vancomycin MIC and the decreased mortality and septic shock rates in MRSA bacteremia [37], [41], [44], and the similar outcomes of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB and SCCmec I–III MRSAB, despite the high prevalence of both complicated (this study) and severe infections in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB [10], [11].

Our study has some limitations. First, only one MRSA isolate included in this study possessed pvl. For this reason, our results are limited to pvl-negative SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA clones. Further investigation is needed, including more common SCCmec IV/IVa MRSA clones such as US300. Second, serum glycopeptide levels could affect the outcomes of SAB and act as a confounding factor, but these values were not included in the analysis because serum vancomycin levels were not measured in all patients. Third, because only one isolate per patient was examined, there is some possibility that the results may not reflect the agr status of all the bloodstream MRSA population but only reflect the predominant population within each patient. Fourth, only agr status, not the overall virulence gene expression of the individual strains, was examined in this study.

In conclusion, the rates of agr dysfunction, hetero-VISA phenotype, and increased vancomycin MICs were lower in SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB than in SCCmec I–III MRSAB in this study. However, the outcomes of SCCmec IV/IVa MRSAB did not differ from those of SCCmec I–III MRSAB.

Acknowledgments

We express our gratitude to Prof. Keichi Hiramatsu for the kind providing Mu50 (a VISA strain) and Mu3 (a hetero-VISA strain), served as controls. We also express our gratitude to Gerard Lina (Centre National de Reference des Toxemiesa Staphylocoques), for providing S. aureus RN4220.

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: HCJ. Performed the experiments: HCJ SJK SMC. Analyzed the data: HCJ SJK. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: KHP JHS HEC SIJ HBK. Wrote the paper: HCJ SJK SIJ.

References

  1. 1. Novick RP (2003) Autoinduction and signal transduction in the regulation of staphylococcal virulence. Mol Microbiol 48: 1429–1449. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03792.x
  2. 2. Vuong C, Saenz HL, Gotz F, Otto M (2000) Impact of the agr quorum-sensing system on adherence to polystyrene in Staphylococcus aureus. J Infect Dis 182: 1688–1693. doi: 10.1086/317606
  3. 3. Kong KF, Vuong C, Otto M (2006) Staphylococcus quorum sensing in biofilm formation and infection. Int J Med Microbiol 296: 133–139. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2006.01.042
  4. 4. Shopsin B, Drlica-Wagner A, Mathema B, Adhikari RP, Kreiswirth BN, et al. (2008) Prevalence of agr dysfunction among colonizing Staphylococcus aureus strains. J Infect Dis 198: 1171–1174. doi: 10.1086/592051
  5. 5. Rose WE, Rybak MJ, Tsuji BT, Kaatz GW, Sakoulas G (2007) Correlation of vancomycin and daptomycin susceptibility in Staphylococcus aureus in reference to accessory gene regulator (agr) polymorphism and function. J Antimicrob Chemother 59: 1190–1193. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkm091
  6. 6. Sakoulas G, Eliopoulos GM, Moellering RC Jr, Wennersten C, Venkataraman L, et al. (2002) Accessory gene regulator (agr) locus in geographically diverse Staphylococcus aureus isolates with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46: 1492–1502. doi: 10.1128/aac.46.5.1492-1502.2002
  7. 7. Tsuji BT, Rybak MJ, Lau KL, Sakoulas G (2007) Evaluation of accessory gene regulator (agr) group and function in the proclivity towards vancomycin intermediate resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 51: 1089–1091. doi: 10.1128/aac.00671-06
  8. 8. Schweizer ML, Furuno JP, Sakoulas G, Johnson JK, Harris AD, et al. (2011) Increased mortality with accessory gene regulator (agr) dysfunction in Staphylococcus aureus among bacteremic patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 55: 1082–1087. doi: 10.1128/aac.00918-10
  9. 9. Chen SY, Wang JT, Chen TH, Lai MS, Chie WC, et al. (2010) Impact of traditional hospital strain of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and community strain of MRSA on mortality in patients with community-onset S aureus bacteremia. Medicine (Baltimore) 89: 285–294. doi: 10.1097/md.0b013e3181f1851e
  10. 10. Kempker RR, Farley MM, Ladson JL, Satola S, Ray SM (2010) Association of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) USA300 genotype with mortality in MRSA bacteremia. J Infect 61: 372–381. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2010.09.021
  11. 11. Kreisel KM, Stine OC, Johnson JK, Perencevich EN, Shardell MD, et al. (2011) USA300 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and the risk of severe sepsis: is USA300 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus associated with more severe infections? Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 70: 285–290. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2011.03.010
  12. 12. Popovich KJ, Weinstein RA, Hota B (2008) Are community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains replacing traditional nosocomial MRSA strains? Clin Infect Dis 46: 787–794. doi: 10.1086/528716
  13. 13. Wang JL, Chen SY, Wang JT, Wu GH, Chiang WC, et al. (2008) Comparison of both clinical features and mortality risk associated with bacteremia due to community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-susceptible S. aureus. Clin Infect Dis 46: 799–806. doi: 10.1086/527389
  14. 14. Wang JT, Wang JL, Fang CT, Chie WC, Lai MS, et al. (2010) Risk factors for mortality of nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infection: with investigation of the potential role of community-associated MRSA strains. J Infect 61: 449–457. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2010.09.029
  15. 15. Wootton M, Howe RA, Hillman R, Walsh TR, Bennett PM, et al. (2001) A modified population analysis profile (PAP) method to detect hetero-resistance to vancomycin in Staphylococcus aureus in a UK hospital. J Antimicrob Chemother 47: 399–403. doi: 10.1093/jac/47.4.399
  16. 16. Kim ES, Lee HJ, Chung GT, Lee YS, Shin DH, et al. (2011) Molecular characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates in Korea. J Clin Microbiol 49: 1979–1982. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00098-11
  17. 17. Kim ES, Song JS, Lee HJ, Choe PG, Park KH, et al. (2007) A survey of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Korea. J Antimicrob Chemother 60: 1108–1114. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkm309
  18. 18. Oliveira DC, de Lencastre H (2002) Multiplex PCR strategy for rapid identification of structural types and variants of the mec element in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46: 2155–2161. doi: 10.1128/aac.46.7.2155-2161.2002
  19. 19. Park C, Lee DG, Kim SW, Choi SM, Park SH, et al. (2007) Predominance of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains carrying staphylococcal chromosome cassette mec type IVA in South Korea. J Clin Microbiol 45: 4021–4026. doi: 10.1128/jcm.01147-07
  20. 20. Lina G, Piemont Y, Godail-Gamot F, Bes M, Peter MO, et al. (1999) Involvement of Panton-Valentine leukocidin-producing Staphylococcus aureus in primary skin infections and pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 29: 1128–1132. doi: 10.1086/313461
  21. 21. David MZ, Glikman D, Crawford SE, Peng J, King KJ, et al. (2008) What is community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus? J Infect Dis 197: 1235–1243. doi: 10.1086/533502
  22. 22. Jenkins TC, Price CS, Sabel AL, Mehler PS, Burman WJ (2008) Impact of routine infectious diseases service consultation on the evaluation, management, and outcomes of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 46: 1000–1008. doi: 10.1086/529190
  23. 23. Li JS, Sexton DJ, Mick N, Nettles R, Fowler VG Jr, et al. (2000) Proposed modifications to the Duke criteria for the diagnosis of infective endocarditis. Clin Infect Dis 30: 633–638. doi: 10.1086/313753
  24. 24. Jang HC, Kim SH, Kim KH, Kim CJ, Lee S, et al. (2009) Salvage treatment for persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: efficacy of linezolid with or without carbapenem. Clin Infect Dis 49: 395–401. doi: 10.1086/600295
  25. 25. Jang HC, Kim CJ, Park KH (2008) Clinical and Microbiological Features Were Different between Bacteremic Staphylococcus aureus with and without agr Function. Program and abstracts of the 48th Annual Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy/Infectious Diseases Society of America 46th Annual Meeting (Washington, DC) [abstract K- 3473].
  26. 26. Kleinschmidt SL, Munckhof WJ, Nimmo GR (2006) In vitro exposure of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains to vancomycin: does vancomycin resistance occur? Int J Antimicrob Agents 27: 168–170. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2005.10.009
  27. 27. Munckhof WJ, Kleinschmidt SL, Turnidge JD (2004) Resistance development in community-acquired strains of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: an in vitro study. Int J Antimicrob Agents 24: 605–608. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2004.08.009
  28. 28. Graber CJ, Wong MK, Carleton HA, Perdreau-Remington F, Haller BL, et al. (2007) Intermediate vancomycin susceptibility in a community-associated MRSA clone. Emerg Infect Dis 13: 491–493. doi: 10.3201/eid1303.060960
  29. 29. Hageman JC, Patel J, Franklin P, Miscavish K, McDougal L, et al. (2008) Occurrence of a USA300 vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 62: 440–442. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2008.08.005
  30. 30. Sola C, Lamberghini RO, Ciarlantini M, Egea AL, Gonzalez P, et al. (2011) Heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate susceptibility in a community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus epidemic clone, in a case of Infective Endocarditis in Argentina. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 10: 15. doi: 10.1186/1476-0711-10-15
  31. 31. Han JH, Edelstein PH, Lautenbach E (2012) Reduced vancomycin susceptibility and staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec) type distribution in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother.
  32. 32. Wright JS, 3rd, Jin R, Novick RP (2005) Transient interference with staphylococcal quorum sensing blocks abscess formation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 102: 1691–1696. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0407661102
  33. 33. Kennedy AD, Bubeck Wardenburg J, Gardner DJ, Long D, Whitney AR, et al. (2010) Targeting of alpha-hemolysin by active or passive immunization decreases severity of USA300 skin infection in a mouse model. J Infect Dis 202: 1050–1058. doi: 10.1086/656043
  34. 34. Cafiso V, Bertuccio T, Santagati M, Demelio V, Spina D, et al. (2007) agr-Genotyping and transcriptional analysis of biofilm-producing Staphylococcus aureus. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 51: 220–227. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-695x.2007.00298.x
  35. 35. Cosgrove SE, Sakoulas G, Perencevich EN, Schwaber MJ, Karchmer AW, et al. (2003) Comparison of mortality associated with methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 36: 53–59. doi: 10.1086/345476
  36. 36. Ariza J, Pujol M, Cabo J, Pena C, Fernandez N, et al. (1999) Vancomycin in surgical infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with heterogeneous resistance to vancomycin. Lancet 353: 1587–1588. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)01017-x
  37. 37. Soriano A, Marco F, Martinez JA, Pisos E, Almela M, et al. (2008) Influence of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration on the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis 46: 193–200. doi: 10.1086/524667
  38. 38. Wong SS, Ho PL, Woo PC, Yuen KY (1999) Bacteremia caused by staphylococci with inducible vancomycin heteroresistance. Clin Infect Dis 29: 760–767. doi: 10.1086/520429
  39. 39. Bae IG, Federspiel JJ, Miro JM, Woods CW, Park L, et al. (2009) Heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate susceptibility phenotype in bloodstream methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from an international cohort of patients with infective endocarditis: prevalence, genotype, and clinical significance. J Infect Dis 200: 1355–1366. doi: 10.1086/606027
  40. 40. Horne KC, Howden BP, Grabsch EA, Graham M, Ward PB, et al. (2009) Prospective comparison of the clinical impacts of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-susceptible MRSA. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 53: 3447–3452. doi: 10.1128/aac.01365-08
  41. 41. Lalueza A, Chaves F, San Juan R, Daskalaki M, Otero JR, et al.. (2010) Is high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration a good marker to predict the outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia? J Infect Dis 201: 311–312; author reply 312–313.
  42. 42. Maor Y, Hagin M, Belausov N, Keller N, Ben-David D, et al. (2009) Clinical features of heteroresistant vancomycin-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia versus those of methicillin-resistant S. aureus bacteremia. J Infect Dis 199: 619–624. doi: 10.1086/596629
  43. 43. Musta AC, Riederer K, Shemes S, Chase P, Jose J, et al. (2009) Vancomycin MIC plus heteroresistance and outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: trends over 11 years. J Clin Microbiol 47: 1640–1644. doi: 10.1128/jcm.02135-08
  44. 44. Price J, Atkinson S, Llewelyn M, Paul J (2009) Paradoxical relationship between the clinical outcome of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and the minimum inhibitory concentration of vancomycin. Clin Infect Dis 48: 997–998. doi: 10.1086/597359
  45. 45. Schwaber MJ, Wright SB, Carmeli Y, Venkataraman L, DeGirolami PC, et al. (2003) Clinical implications of varying degrees of vancomycin susceptibility in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Emerg Infect Dis 9: 657–664. doi: 10.3201/eid0906.030001
  46. 46. Walraven CJ, North MS, Marr-Lyon L, Deming P, Sakoulas G, et al. (2011) Site of infection rather than vancomycin MIC predicts vancomycin treatment failure in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother 66: 2386–2392. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkr301
  47. 47. Peleg AY, Monga D, Pillai S, Mylonakis E, Moellering RC Jr, et al. (2009) Reduced susceptibility to vancomycin influences pathogenicity in Staphylococcus aureus infection. J Infect Dis 199: 532–536. doi: 10.1086/596511