2000PubMedRequires access

Characterization of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains by a set of MRSA phages.

M Mathur, P L Mehndiratta

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

A recently developed international set of phages for typing methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was used to characterize 300 strains of MRSA. The results were compared to that of phage typing with conventional phages and reverse phage typing. The use of MRSA phages increased the percentage typability from 17.6 per cent with the conventional set to 45.6 per cent with MRSA set and the strains were recognised as five distinct phage pattern viz., 622, M3/M5, MR8/MR12/MR25, 30/33/38 and mixed group. Phage type 622 was the most prevalent. On reverse phage typing 73 per cent strains could be typed with most strains belonging to one pattern i.e., 83A complex with limited discrimination. These 83A strains were highly resistant to erythromycin (98%) and tetracycline (93%). Our results show that MRSA phages are more useful in increasing typability and discrimination between the strains as compared to the conventional phages, reverse phage typing, and antibiogramtyping.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A recently developed international set of phages for typing methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was used to characterize 300 strains of MRSA. The results were compared to that of phage typing with conventional phages and reverse phage typing. The use of MRSA phages increased the percentage typability from 17.6 per cent with the conventional set to 45.6 per cent with MRSA set and the strains were recognised as five distinct phage pattern viz., 622, M3/M5, MR8/MR12/MR25, 30/33/38 and mixed group. Phage type 622 was the most prevalent. On reverse phage typing 73 per cent strains could be typed with most strains belonging to one pattern i.e., 83A complex with limited discrimination. These 83A strains were highly resistant to erythromycin (98%) and tetracycline (93%). Our results show that MRSA phages are more useful in increasing typability and discrimination between the strains as compared to the conventional phages, reverse phage typing, and antibiogramtyping.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A recently developed international set of phages for typing methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was used to characterize 300 strains of MRSA. The results were compared to that of phage typing with conventional phages and reverse phage typing. The use of MRSA phages increased the percentage typability from 17.6 per cent with the conventional set to 45.6 per cent with MRSA set and the strains were recognised as five distinct phage pattern viz., 622, M3/M5, MR8/MR12/MR25, 30/33/38 and mixed group. Phage type 622 was the most prevalent. On reverse phage typing 73 per cent strains could be typed with most strains belonging to one pattern i.e., 83A complex with limited discrimination. These 83A strains were highly resistant to erythromycin (98%) and tetracycline (93%). Our results show that MRSA phages are more useful in increasing typability and discrimination between the strains as compared to the conventional phages, reverse phage typing, and antibiogramtyping.

Key concepts: Phage typing, Microbiology, Staphylococcus aureus, Typing, Tetracycline, Biology, Erythromycin, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Characterization of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains by a set of MRSA phages. — Research Paper | ScholarLens