Lorraine Power

Incidence, management and outcomes of the first cfr-mediated linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis outbreak in a tertiary referral centre in the Republic of Ireland.

AIM To report the first Irish outbreak of cfr-mediated linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis. METHODS Linezolid-resistant S. epidermidis isolated at University Hospital Limerick from four blood cultures, one wound and four screening swabs (from nine patients) between April and June 2013 were characterized by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) and staphylococcal cassette chromosome (SCCmec) typing. Antibiotic susceptibilities were determined according to the guidelines of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. The outbreak was controlled through prohibiting prescription and use of linezolid, adherence to infection prevention and control practices, enhanced environmental cleaning, isolation of affected patients, and hospital-wide education programmes. FINDINGS PFGE showed that all nine isolates represented a single clonal strain. MLST showed that they belonged to ST2, and SCCmec typing showed that they encoded a variant of SCCmecIII. All nine isolates were cfr positive, and eight isolates were positive for the G2576T 23S rRNA mutation commonly associated with linezolid resistance. Isolates exhibited multiple antibiotic resistances (i.e. linezolid, gentamicin, methicillin, clindamycin, ciprofloxacin, fusidic acid and rifampicin). The adopted infection prevention intervention was effective, and the outbreak was limited to the affected intensive care unit. CONCLUSIONS This is the first documented outbreak of cfr-mediated linezolid-resistant S. epidermidis in the Republic of Ireland. Despite this, and due to existing outbreak management protocols, the responsible micro-organism and source were identified efficiently. However, it became apparent that staff knowledge of antimicrobial susceptibilities and appropriate hygiene practices were suboptimal at the time of the outbreak, and that educational interventions (and re-inforcement) are necessary to avoid occurrence of antimicrobial resistance and outbreaks such as reported here.

A commentary on the role of molecular technology and automation in clinical diagnostics

Historically, the identification of bacterial or yeast isolates has been based on phenotypic characteristics such as growth on defined media, colony morphology, Gram stain, and various biochemical reactions, with significant delay in diagnosis. Clinical microbiology as a medical specialty has embraced advances in molecular technology for rapid species identification with broad-range 16S rDNA polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and matrix-assisted laser desorption and/or ionization time of flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectrometry demonstrated as accurate, rapid, and cost-effective methods for the identification of most, but not all, bacteria and yeasts. Protracted conventional incubation times previously necessary to identify certain species have been mitigated, affording patients quicker diagnosis with associated reduction in exposure to empiric broad-spectrum antimicrobial therapy and shortened hospital stay. This short commentary details such molecular advances and their implications in the clinical microbiology setting.

An optimized work-flow to reduce time-to-detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) using direct testing from rectal swabs

ABSTRACT Rapid detection of patients with carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) is essential for the prevention of nosocomial cross-transmission, allocation of isolation facilities and to protect patient safety. Here, we aimed to design a new laboratory work-flow, utilizing existing laboratory resources, in order to reduce time-to-diagnosis of CPE. A review of the current CPE testing processes and of the literature was performed to identify a real-time commercial polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay that could facilitate batch testing of CPE clinical specimens, with adequate CPE gene coverage. Stool specimens (210) were collected; CPE-positive inpatients (n = 10) and anonymized community stool specimens (n = 200). Rectal swabs (eSwab™) were inoculated from collected stool specimens and a manual DNA extraction method (QIAamp® DNA Stool Mini Kit) was employed. Extracted DNA was then processed on the Check-Direct CPE® assay. The three step process of making the eSwab™, extracting DNA manually and running the Check-Direct CPE® assay, took <5 min, 1 h 30 min and 1 h 50 min, respectively. It was time efficient with a result available in under 4 h, comparing favourably with the existing method of CPE screening; average time-to-diagnosis of 48/72 h. Utilizing this CPE work-flow would allow a ‘same-day’ result. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing results, as is current practice, would remain a ‘next-day’ result. In conclusion, the Check-Direct CPE® assay was easily integrated into a local laboratory work-flow and could facilitate a large volume of CPE screening specimens in a single batch, making it cost-effective and convenient for daily CPE testing.