Premium
Comparison of arbitrarily primed‐polymerase chain reaction and pulse‐field gel electrophoresis for characterizing methicillin‐resistant Staphylococcus aureus
Author(s) -
Kondoh K.,
Furuya D.,
Yagihashi A.,
Uehara N.,
Nakamura M.,
Kobayashi D.,
Tsuji N.,
Watanabe N.
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
letters in applied microbiology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.698
H-Index - 110
eISSN - 1472-765X
pISSN - 0266-8254
DOI - 10.1046/j.1472-765x.2002.01140.x
Subject(s) - pulsed field gel electrophoresis , genotyping , microbiology and biotechnology , genotype , staphylococcus aureus , polymerase chain reaction , biology , gel electrophoresis , methicillin resistant staphylococcus aureus , gene , bacteria , genetics
Aims: The aim of this study was to analyse genotypes for clinical isolates of methicillin‐resistantStaphylococcus aureus(MRSA), including hetero‐vancomycin‐resistantStaph. aureus (VRSA), at a Japanese university hospital. Methods and Results: Seventy‐eight clinical isolates of MRSA were analysed by arbitrarily primed‐polymerase chain reaction (AP‐PCR) using ERIC2 primer and by pulse‐field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) following SmaI digestion. Analyses of the nine genotypes and 28 subtypes defined by PFGE, and of the three genotypes and 22 subtypes defined by AP‐PCR, both facilitated epidemiological tracing. Used in combination, AP‐PCR and PFGE provided more precise classification than the use of a single genotyping method. The six hetero‐VRSA isolates were classified into four genotypes defined by the combination of both methods, but these genotypes contained non‐VRSA isolates. Conclusions: The results suggest that both PFGE and AP‐PCR are useful in discriminating MRSA, but not hetero‐VRSA, isolates for epidemiological analysis. Significance and Impact of the Study: Combining the results of PFGE with the results of AP‐PCR can provide more detail differentiation of MRSA and hetero‐MRSA isolates than either method alone.