Comparison of an automated repetitive-sequence-based PCR microbial typing system with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for molecular typing of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium
- PMID: 20554812
- PMCID: PMC2916582
- DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00136-10
Comparison of an automated repetitive-sequence-based PCR microbial typing system with pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for molecular typing of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium
Abstract
Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) has become an important health care-associated pathogen because of its rapid spread, limited therapeutic options, and possible transfer of vancomycin resistance to more-virulent pathogens. In this study, we compared the ability to detect clonal relationships among VRE isolates by an automated repetitive-sequence-based PCR (Rep-PCR) system (DiversiLab system) to pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), the reference method for molecular typing of VRE. Two sets of VRE isolates evaluated in this study were collected by active microbial surveillance at a large teaching hospital in Taiwan during 2008. The first set included 90 isolates randomly selected from the surveillance cohort. The first set consisted of 34 pulsotypes and 10 Rep-PCR types. There was good correlation between the two methods (P < 0.001). The second set included 68 VRE isolates collected from eight clusters of colonization. A dominant clone was detected in five out of eight clusters by both methods. Two clusters were characterized by Rep-PCR as being caused by a dominant clone, whereas PFGE showed polyclonal origins. One cluster was shown to be polyclonal by both methods. A single Rep-PCR clone type was detected among 12 of 14 vancomycin-intermediate enterococci, whereas PFGE detected six pulsotypes. In conclusion, the Rep-PCR method correlated well with PFGE typing but was less discriminative than PFGE in defining clonal relationships. The ease of use and more rapid turnaround time of Rep-PCR compared to PFGE offers a rapid screening method to detect outbreaks of VRE and more rapidly implement control measures. PFGE remains the preferred method to confirm clonal spread.
Figures



References
-
- Bertin, M. L., J. Vinski, S. Schmitt, C. Sabella, L. Danziger-Isakov, M. McHugh, G. W. Procop, G. Hall, S. M. Gordon, and J. Goldfarb. 2006. Outbreak of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization and infection in a neonatal intensive care unit epidemiologically linked to a healthcare worker with chronic otitis. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 27:581-585. - PubMed
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1993. Nosocomial enterococci resistant to vancomycin-United States, 1989-1993. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 42:597-599. - PubMed
-
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1995. Recommendations for preventing the spread of vancomycin resistance. Recommendations of the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). MMWR Recommend. Rep. 44:1-13. - PubMed
-
- Chen, M. L., S. C. Chang, H. J. Pan, P. R. Hsueh, L. S. Yang, S. W. Ho, and K. T. Luh. 1999. Longitudinal analysis of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates at a teaching hospital in Taiwan. J. Formos. Med. Assoc. 98:426-432. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources