Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Brief Report
Case Report
Case Report and Review
Case Reports
Case Series
Commentary
Editorial
Erratum
How do I do it
How I do it?
Invited Editorial
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Letters to the Editor
Mini Review
Original Article
Original Articles
Original Research
Other Type
Others
Review Article
Short communication
Short Paper
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Brief Report
Case Report
Case Report and Review
Case Reports
Case Series
Commentary
Editorial
Erratum
How do I do it
How I do it?
Invited Editorial
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letters to Editor
Letters to the Editor
Mini Review
Original Article
Original Articles
Original Research
Other Type
Others
Review Article
Short communication
Short Paper
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Original Article
9 (
4
); 314-316
doi:
10.4103/JLP.JLP_161_16

High prevalence of clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus blood culture isolates in São Paulo, Brazil

Department of Pathology, Division of Microbiology, School of Medicine, Santa Casa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Address for correspondence: Dr. Marcelo J. Mimica, Departamento de Ciências Patológicas, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas da Santa Casa de São Paulo, Disciplina de Microbiologia, Rua Cesário Motta Júnior, 112, São Paulo, Brazil. E-mail: mjmimica@hotmail.com
Licence

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Clindamycin has become an important antimicrobial option for the treatment of Staphylococcus aureus. However, little is known about the current patterns of clindamycin-susceptibility in S. aureus invasive isolates, both in our country and in other developing countries in the world.

AIMS:

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of constitutive and inducible clindamycin resistance in methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) blood culture isolates in São Paulo, Brazil.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:

From July 2011 to June 2012, all S. aureus isolates from blood cultures collected at our hospital were included in the study. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed according to recommendations of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.

RESULTS:

Total prevalence of clindamycin resistance was 68%, including 7.2% with inducible resistance. In MRSA resistance rate was 90.8% whereas in MSSA the rate was 32.7%.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our high prevalence of clindamycin resistance highlights the importance of performing D-test in a routine base, as well of maintaining continued surveillance for the prevalence of clindamycin resistance.

Keywords

Clindamycin
methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus
Staphylococcus aureus

Introduction

Staphylococcus aureus is a major cause of community- and health-care associated infections worldwide. In the last decades, treatment of such infections has been complicated by escalating antimicrobial resistance. Penicillin- and methicillin-resistant strains have disseminated globally and more recently, community-associated methicillin- resistant S. aureus (CA-MRSA) as well vancomycin-intermediate, and vancomycin-resistant S. aureus isolates have been described and are also disseminating.[123]

Clindamycin has become an important antimicrobial option for the treatment of both methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and MRSA, mainly CA S. aureus infections.[34] However, little is known about the current patterns of clindamycin-susceptibility in S. aureus invasive isolates, both in our country and in other developing countries in the world.

Resistance to clindamycin in S. aureus derives from target site modification, mediated by erm genes, which lead to ribosomal methylation. Resistance may occur either in an inducible or constitutive form.[4]

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of constitutive and inducible clindamycin resistance in MSSA, and MRSA blood culture isolates in São Paulo, Brazil.

Materials and Methods

From July 2011 to June 2012, all S. aureus isolates from blood cultures collected at our hospital were included in the study. Our hospital is a quaternary care general hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. Isolates were identified using traditional microbiology methods, including Gram stain, catalase, coagulase, and DNAse.

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed according to recommendations of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI).[5] D-test was performed to detect inducible clindamycin resistance, also following recommendations issued by the CLSI.[5]

S. aureus isolates from blood cultures of patients that already had an isolate included in the study were excluded. Thus, only one (the first) isolate per patient was included in the study.

Results

During the study, we included 125 isolates. Seventy-six (60.8%) were MRSA and 49 (39.2%) were MSSA. Total prevalence of clindamycin resistance was 68% (85/125), including 76 (60.8%) with constitutive resistance and 9 (7.2%) with inducible resistance. Regarding the MRSA, one of the 76 isolates had inducible clindamycin resistance, and 68 had constitutive resistance. Only 7 (9.2%) MRSA were clindamycin susceptible. Of the 49 MSSA, 16 were resistant to clindamycin, including eight with inducible resistance and eight with constitutive resistance. Thirty-three (67.3%) were clindamycin susceptible.

Discussion

Although inducible clindamycin resistance was present in only nine isolates, this finding highlights the paramount importance of the routine use by D-test by clinical microbiology laboratories, since the resistance in these isolates would not be detected without this specific method. D-test is recommended routinely both by the CLSI and by the European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing.[56] However, even in developing countries, only a fraction of clinical laboratories follow such recommendations.[7]

The high prevalence of clindamycin resistance may impact empirical therapy in the era of dissemination of CA-MRSA since clindamycin is now used globally as empirical treatment for possible S. aureus infections where CA-MRSA is common.[47] Others have also reported elevated rates of clindamycin resistance in S. aureus.[8910] Glycopeptides, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and a number of new antimicrobial agents are being used in such cases, but their use is sometimes problematic, due to resistance or limited scientific evidence supporting it.[3] In addition, clindamycin is an important part of antimicrobial therapy for cases of toxic shock syndrome. Linezolid has recently also been showed to reduce toxic shock syndrome toxin-1 production and could be an option in these cases. However, its costs and availability are still a concern.[11]

Continued surveillance for the presence of clindamycin resistance is paramount to ensure adequate empirical antimicrobial therapy. Appropriate in vitro antimicrobial susceptibility tests, including D-test, are important not only as part of surveillance efforts but also to guarantee correct specific treatment for individual patients with staphylococcal infections.

Conclusions

Our high prevalence of clindamycin resistance highlights the importance of performing D-test in a routine base, as well of maintaining continued surveillance for the prevalence of clindamycin resistance.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. , , , . Healthcare associated PVL negative methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with SCCmec type IV. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2009;28:934.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , , . SCCmec type IV, PVL-negative, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in cystic fibrosis patients from Brazil. Curr Microbiol. 2011;62:388-90.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , . Recurrent challenges for clinicians: Emergence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin resistance, and current treatment options. J Lab Physicians. 2013;5:71-8.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , , , . Clindamycin-resistant methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Epidemiologic and molecular characteristics and associated clinical factors. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;74:16-21.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. . Performance Standards for Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing: Twenty-Third Informational Supplement, M100-S23. Wayne, PA: EUA, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; .
  6. The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Available from: http://www.eucast.org/clinical_breakpoints/
  7. , , , . Adherence to CLSI recommendations for testing of Staphylococcus aureus isolates in Louisiana hospitals: Report of a clinical failure and results of a questionnaire study. J Clin Microbiol. 2011;49:3019-20.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , . Antibiotic susceptibility and genomic variations in Staphylococcus aureus associated with Skin and Soft Tissue Infection (SSTI) disease groups. BMC Infect Dis. 2016;16:276.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , , , , . Diversity in the antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clones. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;31:3317-21.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , , , , . Emergence of resistance among USA300 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates causing invasive disease in the United States. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:3804-11.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. , , , , , , . Impact of antibiotics on expression of virulence-associated exotoxin genes in methicillin-sensitive and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Infect Dis. 2007;195:202-11.
    [Google Scholar]
Show Sections