Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 1999 Jun;43(6):1412-6.
doi: 10.1128/AAC.43.6.1412.

Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to evaluate the efficacy of mupirocin for eradicating carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial to evaluate the efficacy of mupirocin for eradicating carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

S Harbarth et al. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1999 Jun.

Abstract

Mupirocin has been widely used for the clearance of nasal methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) carriage during outbreaks, but no placebo-controlled trial has evaluated its value for eradicating MRSA carriage at multiple body sites in settings where MRSA is not epidemic. In a 1,500-bed teaching hospital with endemic MRSA, 102 patients colonized with MRSA were randomized into a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and treated with either mupirocin (group M) or placebo (group P) applied to the anterior nares for 5 days; both groups used chlorhexidine soap for body washing. Follow-up screening, susceptibility testing, and genotyping were performed to evaluate treatment success, mupirocin or chlorhexidine resistance, and exogenous recolonization. At baseline, MRSA carriage was 60% in the nares, 38% in the groin, and 62% in other sites (skin lesions, urine). The MRSA eradication rate (all body sites) was 25% in group M (12 of 48 patients), compared to 18% in group P (9 of 50 patients; relative risk [RR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI95], 0.33 to 1.55). At the end of follow-up, 44% of patients (19 of 43) were free of nasal MRSA in group M, compared to 23% (11 of 44) in group P (RR, 0.57; CI95, 0.31 to 1.04). Ten patients developed MRSA infections (three in group M and seven in group P). One mupirocin treatment failure was due to exogenous MRSA recolonization. No MRSA isolate showed chlorhexidine resistance or high-level mupirocin resistance; however, we observed an association (P = 0.003) between low-level mupirocin resistance at study entry (prevalence, 23%) and subsequent treatment failure in both study arms. These results suggest that nasal mupirocin is only marginally effective in the eradication of multisite MRSA carriage in a setting where MRSA is endemic.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Bertino J S., Jr Intranasal mupirocin for outbreaks of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1997;54:2185–2191. - PubMed
    1. Boyce J M. Preventing staphylococcal infections by eradicating nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus: proceeding with caution. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1996;17:775–779. - PubMed
    1. Bradley S F, Ramsey M A, Morton T M, Kauffman C A. Mupirocin resistance: clinical and molecular epidemiology. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1995;16:354–358. - PubMed
    1. British Society of Antimicrobial Agents and Hospital Infection Society. Revised guidelines for the control of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection in hospitals. J Hosp Infect. 1998;39:253–290. - PubMed
    1. Cookson B D. The emergence of mupirocin resistance: a challenge to infection control and antibiotic prescribing practice. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1998;41:11–18. - PubMed

Publication types