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
. 2018 Oct 3;14(1):300.
doi: 10.1186/s12917-018-1611-0.

Investigation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among clinical isolates from humans and animals by culture methods and multiplex PCR

Affiliations

Investigation of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among clinical isolates from humans and animals by culture methods and multiplex PCR

M M Rahman et al. BMC Vet Res. .

Abstract

Background: Staphylococcus aureus is responsible for large numbers of hospital-related and community-acquired infections. In this study, we investigated the presence of S. aureus and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) in 100 samples from animals (55 cattle, 36 dogs, and 9 cats) and 150 samples from hospitalized human patients. The samples were collected from healthy and diseased animals and from diseased humans and included milk, wound swab, pus, exudates, nasal swab and diabetic ulcer. Initially, S. aureus was isolated and identified by colony morphology, Gram staining, and biochemical tests (catalase and coagulase tests). The S. aureus-positive samples were examined by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to determine their MRSA status.

Results: Of the 100 animal samples, 29 were positive for S. aureus. Four samples (13.8%) from dogs were MRSA-positive, but samples from cattle and cats were MRSA-negative. Of the 150 human samples we collected, 64 were S. aureus-positive and, of these, 34 (53.1%) were MRSA-positive. Most (28%) of the MRSA samples were isolated from surgical wound swabs, followed by the pus from skin infections (11%), exudates from diabetic ulcers (6%), exudates from burns (4%), and aural swabs (3%). By contrast, a low MRSA detection rate (n = 4) was seen in the non-human isolates, where all MRSA bacteria were isolated from nasal swabs from dogs. The antimicrobials susceptibility testing results showed that S. aureus isolates with mecA genes showed resistance to penicillin (100%), oxacillin (100%), erythromycin (73.5%), ciprofloxacin (70.6%), and gentamicin (67.7%). The lowest resistance was found against ceftazidime, and no vancomycin-resistant isolates were obtained.

Conclusions: We detected S. aureus and MRSA in both human and canine specimens. Isolates were found to be resistant to some of the antimicrobials available locally. MRSA carriage in humans and animals appears to be a great threat to effective antimicrobials treatment. The prudent use of antimicrobials will reduce the antimicrobial resistance. Our findings will help to find the most appropriate treatment and to reduce antimicrobial resistance in the future by implementing prudent use of antimicrobials. Further studies are required to better understand the epidemiology of MRSA human-animal inter-species transmission in Bangladesh.

Keywords: Animals; Bangladesh; Humans; MRSA; Staphylococcus aureus.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Informed verbal and written consent for the collection of samples was obtained from all patients and the owners of the animals (verbal consent only). The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of Mymensingh Medical College and Bangladesh Agricultural University, Bangladesh.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Multiplex PCR assay to identify mecA (157 bp), nuc (297 bp), and 16S rRNA genes (756 bp) in S. aureus

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Barber M, Rozwadowska-Dowzenko M. Infection by penicillin-resistant Staphylococci. Lancet. 1948;252:641–644. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(48)92166-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barber M. Methicillin-resistant staphylococci. J Clin Pathol. 1961;14:385–394. doi: 10.1136/jcp.14.4.385. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Boucher HW, Corey GR. Epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:S344–S349. doi: 10.1086/533590. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Knox J, Uhlemann AC, Lowy FD. Staphylococcus aureus infections: transmission within households and the community. Trends Microbiol. 2015;23:437–444. doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2015.03.007. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Khan A, Wilson B, Gould IM. Current and future treatment options for community-associated MRSA infection. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2018;19:457–470. doi: 10.1080/14656566.2018.1442826. - DOI - PubMed

MeSH terms