IN VITRO ACTIVITY AND EMERGENCE OF RESISTANCE TO MUPIROCIN IN STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS

  • Margalida Rotger Division of Infectious Diseases Mayo Clinic Rochester Minnesota USA
  • Viktorija Tomič University Clinic of Respiratory and Allergic Diseases Golnik Slovenia
  • Andrej Trampuž Division of Infectious Diseases Mayo Clinic Rochester Minnesota USA
Keywords: mupirocin, Staphylococcus aureus, resistance

Abstract

Background. Nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus is an important risk factor for later infection with the same strain. Topical mupirocin is used for S. aureus nasal decolonization. However, due to increasing mupirocin misuse resistance may develop rapidly. We determined the in vitro activity of mupirocin and compared the emergence of resistance among 30 methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) isolates and 30 methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) isolates.

Methods. Minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined according to the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards (NCCLS). Emergence of resistance studies were performed by incubating the isolates with increasing concentrations of mupirocin (0.125 to 16 µg/ml) over 8 days in Mueller-Hinton broth (MHB). Isolates were screened for resistance using Mueller-Hinton agar plates with 4 µg/ml of mupirocin.

Results. MICs were determined for all recovered isolates. Before mupirocin exposure, MSSA and MRSA MIC90 (range) in µg/ml were 0.25 (0.06–4) and 0.25 (0.06–0.5). After one day of mupirocin exposure, all recovered isolates demonstrated decreased susceptibility to mupirocin (MSSA MIC90 64 µg/ml and MRSA MIC90 32 µg/ml). On subsequent days, no further significant changes in the mupirocin MIC90 was detected.

Conclusions. The in vitro study suggests that mupirocin resistance emerges easily and early after exposure to low antimicrobial concentrations. Therefore, mupirocin should be used prudently and should always be combined with other decolonization interventions such as gargling and skin wash with chlohexidine.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Chang FY, Singh N, Gayowski T, Drenning SD, Wagener MM, Marino IR. Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization and association with infections in liver transplant recipients. Transplantation 1998; 65: 1169-72.

Kluytmans J, van Belkum A, Verbrugh H. Nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus: epidemiology, underlying mechanisms, and associated risks. Clin Microbiol Rev 1997; 10: 505-20.

Von Eiff C, Becker K, Machka K, Stammer H, Peters G. Nasal carriage as a source of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Study Group. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 11-6.

Weinke T, Schiller R, Fehrenbach FJ, Pohle HD. Association between Staphylococcus aureus nasopharyngeal colonization and septicemia in patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1992; 11: 985-9.

Cookson BD. The emergence of mupirocin resistance: a challenge to infection control and antibiotic prescribing practice. J Antimicrob Chemother 1998; 41: 11-8.

Miller MA, Dascal A, Portnoy J, Mendelson J. Development of mupirocin resistance among methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus after widespread use of nasal mupirocin ointment. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1996; 17: 811-3.

Watanabe H, Masaki H, Asoh N et al. Emergence and spread of low-level mupirocin resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from a community hospital in Japan. J Hosp Infect 2002; 47: 294–300.

Annigeri R, Conly J, Vas S et al. Emergence of mupirocin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in chronic peritoneal dialysis patients using mupirocin prophylaxis to prevent exit-site infection. Perit Dial Int 2001; 21: 554-9.

Harbarth S, Dharan S, Liassine N, Herrault P, Auckenthaler R, Pittet D. Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to evaluate the efficacy of mupirocin for eradicating carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43: 1412-6.

Tenover FC, Arbeit RD, Goering RV et al. Interpreting chromosomal DNA restriction patterns produced by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis: criteria for bacterial strain typing. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33: 2233-9.

NCCLS. Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically. National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards, 6th ed, vol Approved standard M7-A6, Wayne, PA 2003.

Finlay JE, Miller LA, Poupard JA. Interpretive criteria for testing susceptibility of staphylococci to mupirocin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1997; 41: 1137-9.

Capobianco JO, Doran CC, Goldman RC. Mechanism of mupirocin transport into sensitive and resistant bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33: 156–63.

Casewell MW, Hill RL. In-vitro activity of mupirocin (»pseudomonic acid«) against clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J Antimicrob Chemother 1985; 15: 523–31.

Watanabe H, Masaki H, Asoh N et al. Low concentrations of mupirocin in the pharynx intranasal application may contribute to mupirocin resistance in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol 2001; 39: 3775–7.

Yanagisawa T, Lee JT, Wu HC, Kawakami M. Relationship of protein structure of isoleucyl-tRNA synthetase with pseudomonic acid resistance of Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem 1994; 269: 24304–9.

Hodgson JE, Curnock SP, Dyke KG, Morris R, Sylvester DR, Gross MS. Molecular characterization of the gene encoding high-level mupirocin reisitance in Staphylococcus aureus J2870. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1994; 38: 1205–8.

How to Cite
1.
Rotger M, Tomič V, Trampuž A. IN VITRO ACTIVITY AND EMERGENCE OF RESISTANCE TO MUPIROCIN IN STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS. TEST ZdravVestn [Internet]. 1 [cited 5Aug.2024];72(10). Available from: http://vestnik-dev.szd.si/index.php/ZdravVest/article/view/1872
Section
Original article