Departments of 1Microbiology and 2Medicine, Kasturba Medical College, Mangalore, India *Corresponding Author e-mail: jyoti.kumari1985@rediffmail.com البكترييا العنقودية الذهبية املقاومة للميثيسيلني املرتبطة بالرعلية الصحية B اخلصائص السريرية و مقاومة املضادات احليوية مع الرتكيز على مقاومة املاكروليد واللينكوساميد-سرتبتوغرامني جيوتي كوماري، �ساليني �سينوي، �رسيكال باليغا، �ساكرباين م.، جوبالكري�سنا باهت abstract: Objectives: Healthcare-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common pathogen worldwide and its multidrug resistance is a major concern. This study aimed to determine the clinical characteristics and antibiotic susceptibility profile of healthcare-associated MRSA with emphasis on resistance to macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B (MLSB) phenotypes and vancomycin. Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out between February 2014 and February 2015 across four tertiary care hospitals in Mangalore, South India. Healthcare-associated infections among 291 inpatients at these hospitals were identified according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines. Clinical specimens were collected based on infection type. S. aureus and MRSA isolates were identified and antibiotic susceptibility tests performed using the Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method. The minimum inhibitory concentration of vancomycin was determined using the Agar dilution method and inducible clindamycin resistance was detected with a double-disk diffusion test (D-test). Results: Out of 291 healthcare-associated S. aureus cases, 88 were MRSA (30.2%). Of these, 54.6% were skin and soft tissue infections. All of the isolates were susceptible to teicoplanin and linezolid. Four MRSA isolates exhibited intermediate resistance to vancomycin (4.6%). Of the MRSA strains, 10 (11.4%) were constitutive MLSB phenotypes, 31 (35.2%) were inducible MLSB phenotypes and 14 (15.9%) were macrolide-streptogramin B phenotypes. Conclusion: Healthcare-associated MRSA multidrug resistance was alarmingly high. In routine antibiotic susceptibility testing, a D-test should always be performed if an isolate is resistant to erythromycin but susceptible to clindamycin. Determination of the minimum inhibitory concentration of vancomycin is necessary when treating patients with MRSA infections. Keywords: Healthcare Associated Infections; Antibiotic Resistance; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Phenotypes; Clindamycin; Vancomycin. الأمرا�س م�سببات من )MRSA( مري�سا ال�سحية بالرعاية املرتبطة للميثي�سيلني العنقودية املكورات مقاومة تعترب اأهداف: امللخ�ص: الأكرث �سيوعا يف جميع اأنحاء العامل ومقاومتها لالأدوية املتعددة م�سدر قلق كبري. هدفت هذه الدرا�سة اإىل حتديد اخل�سائ�س ال�رسيرية وخ�سائ�س احل�سا�سية للم�سادات احليوية لهذه اجلرثومة املتعلقة بالرعاية ال�سحية مع الرتكيز على مقاومتها ملاكرومليد لينكو�ساميد اأربع يف 2015 وفرباير 2014 فرباير بني ما الفرتة يف امل�ستعر�سة الدرا�سة هذه اأجريت منهجية: الفانكوماي�سني. و B �سرتبتوغرامني املر�سى من 291 بني من ال�سحية بالرعاية املتعلقة العدوى حتديد مت وقد الهند. بجنوب ماجنالور يف الثالثية للرعاية م�ست�سفيات نوع على بناءا ال�رسيرية العينات جمع مت منها. والوقاية الأمرا�س على ال�سيطرة مراكز لتعليمات وفقا امل�ست�سفيات هذه يف املنومني الإ�سابة. وقد مت حتديد بكرتيا املكورة العنقودية واملري�سا واأجريت اختبارات احل�سا�سية با�ستخدام طريقة كريبي باور باأقرا�س امل�سادات الك�سف ومت الكلينداماي�سني ومقاومة الآجار تخفيف طريقة با�ستخدام للفانكوماي�سني املثبط للرتكيز الأدنى احلد حتديد مت احليوىة. .)30.2%( مري�سا ب�سبب كانت حالة 88 ال�سحية، بالرعاية متعلقة حالة 291 من D-. نتائج: لأقرا�س املزدوج النت�سار باختبار عنها منها %54.6 حالة التهابات جلدية واأن�سجة رخوة. وكانت جميع العينات املعزولة ح�سا�سة للتيكوبالنني وينزوليد. اأظهرت اأربعة عينات جرثومية معزولة مقاومة متو�سطة للفانكوماي�سني )%4.6(. 10 )%11.4( من عينات مري�سا كانت من نوع MLSB الأ�سا�سية، و 31 )35.2%( من نوع MLSB املحر�س و 14 )%15.9( كانوا من النوع املقاوم ملاكروليد �سرتبتوغرامنيB. خامتة: اإن ن�سبة مقاومة املكورات العنقودية احليوية للم�سادات احل�سا�سية اختبارات يف دائما D فح�س يوؤدي اأن ينبغي ومقلقة: عالية ال�سحية بالرعاية املرتبطة للميثي�سيلني الروتينية اإذا كانت العينة املعزولة مقاومة لالإريرثومي�سني لكن ح�سا�سة لكلينداماي�سني. حتديد احلد الأدنى لرتكيز مثبط للفانكوماي�سني �رسوري عند عالج املر�سى الذين يعانون من التهابات مري�سا. الظواهر؛ للميثي�سيلني؛ املقاومة الذهبية العنقودية املكورات احليوية؛ امل�سادات مقاومة ال�سحية؛ بالرعاية املرتبطة العدوى مفتاحية: كلمات كلينداماي�سني؛ فانكوماي�سني. Healthcare-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Clinical characteristics and antibiotic resistance profile with emphasis on macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance *Jyoti Kumari,1 Shalini M. Shenoy,1 Shrikala Baliga,1 Chakrapani M.,2 Gopalkrishna K. Bhat1 clinical & basic research Sultan Qaboos University Med J, May 2016, Vol. 16, Iss. 2, pp. 175–181, Epub. 15 May 16 Submitted 6 Jan 16 Revision Req. 2 Feb 16; Revision Recd. 3 Feb 16 Accepted 10 Feb 16 doi: 10.18295/squmj.2016.16.02.007 Healthcare-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Clinical characteristics and antibiotic resistance profile with emphasis on macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance e176 | SQU Medical Journal, May 2016, Volume 16, Issue 2 Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was first identified in the 1960s and continues to be a significant pathogen worldwide, causing a variety of infections from minor skin and soft tissue infections to severe osteomyelitis, bacteraemia and sepsis.1 Healthcare- associated MRSA spreads through direct or indirect contact and normally exhibits multidrug resistance.1 The distribution of healthcare-associated MRSA varies geographically; rates in the Western Pacific region, Latin America, the USA and Europe are 46.0%, 34.9%, 34.2% and 26.3%, respectively.2 In contrast, northern European countries such as Denmark, the Netherlands, Iceland and Sweden have reported rates of <1.0%.3 In Asia, the prevalence varies from 22.6–86.5%, with the highest rate reported in Sri Lanka and the lowest in India.4 Nevertheless, the rate of healthcare-associated MRSA in India has steadily increased over the past few years, from <20.0% in 2002 to 39.6% in 2012.5–8 The rise of multidrug-resistant healthcare- associated MRSA cases has reduced the number of available therapeutic options for these infections. Potential antibiotics include daptomycin, linezolid, quinupristin/dalfopristin, trimethoprim/sulfametho- xazole and vancomycin.9 Glycopeptides, in particular vancomycin, are the treatment of choice for serious infections.9 The macrolide-lincosamide-streptogra- min B (MLSB) group of antibiotics can be used to treat less severe skin and soft tissue infections.9 The lincosamide antibiotic clindamycin is often preferred because of its low cost and pharmacokinetic properties, including significant tissue penetration, an extended half-life and the ability to inhibit toxin production.9,10 Unfortunately, the widespread use of MLSB antibiotics has resulted in increased resistance which occurs either due to an efflux mechanism encoded by the methionine sulfoxide reductase A gene or a ribosomal target site modification encoded by the erythromycin ribosomal methylase gene.10 Constitutive MLSB (cMLSB) resistance can be detected in routine susceptibility testing by its resistance to both erythromycin and clindamycin; in contrast, bacteria with inducible MLSB (iMLSB) resistance appear resistant to erythromycin but susceptible to clindamycin in routine testing, thereby posing a problem in detection.10 As a result, if clindamycin is used for the treatment of infections caused by these strains, the treatment will fail. It is therefore important to detect this kind of resistance. The available literature does not reveal precise data on MLSB-resistant phenotypes and the susceptibility profile to vancomycin among healthcare-associated MRSA-affected populations from South India. Consequently, the present study was conducted to determine the clinical characteristics and antibiotic susceptibility patterns of MRSA isolates from clinical specimens taken from a South Indian cohort, with emphasis on the aforementioned factors. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted from February 2014 to February 2015 among four tertiary care hospitals in Mangalore, South India. Two of the hospitals were governmental hospitals with 600 and 250 beds, respectively, while the other two were private hospitals with 510 and 251 beds, respectively. The governmental hospitals had general surgery and neurosurgical departments, burn units, general intensive care units (ICUs) and urology, nephrology, dermatology, gynaecology and paediatric wards. In addition to the aforementioned departments, the private hospitals also had oncology, haematology, cardiothoracic and nephrosurgery departments as well as general, nephrosurgery, neurosurgery and cardiothoracic ICUs. The inclusion criteria included inpatients presenting to one of the four hospitals with localised or systemic conditions resulting from the presence of an infectious agent or its toxins which was not present or incubating at the time of admission to the hospital but only became evident 48 hours after admission or longer. In addition, patients with a history of hospitalisation, haemodialysis, surgery or admission to a long-term healthcare facility within the previous Advances in Knowledge - A high rate of inducible macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B (MLSB) phenotypes were found among healthcare-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates identified from clinical specimens in the current study. - Four cases of healthcare-associated MRSA with intermediate resistance to vancomycin were detected. This finding challenges the efficacy of vancomycin in cases of serious multidrug-resistant healthcare-associated MRSA infections. Application to Patient Care - The results of this study indicate the necessity of performing double-disk diffusion tests to identify inducible MLS B resistance to prevent the therapeutic failure of clindamycin in healthcare-associated MRSA cases. - Additionally, these findings suggest that the minimum inhibitory concentration of vancomycin should be determined in order to guide therapy. Jyoti Kumari, Shalini M. Shenoy, Shrikala Baliga, Chakrapani M. and Gopalkrishna K. Bhat Clinical and Basic Research | e177 year and those with indwelling catheters, intravenous lines or other percutaneous medical devices at the time of culture collection were included. Outpatients and those with no healthcare-associated MRSA risk factors who were diagnosed with an S. aureus infection within 48 hours of hospitalisation were excluded.11,12 The sample size was calculated using the following formula:13 where Z1-α is 1.96 (95% confidence interval), p is 0.37 (expected proportion), q is 0.63 (1-p) and d is 0.0555 (relative precision of 15% of p, i.e. allowable error). The expected proportion was selected based on a previous study.14 The total sample size required was therefore 291 patients. The criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were used to identify healthcare-associated infections due to S. aureus.12 A structured pro forma was used to collect the demographic and clinical details of the patients. Based on the type and site of infection, clinical specimens such as pus/exudates, blood, sput- um and indwelling medical devices (i.e. central line tips, peripheral intravenous catheters, endotracheal tubes and urinary catheters) were collected from the patients and processed by the Department of Microbiology at the Kasturba Medical College in Mangalore. Gram staining of the specimens was performed followed by blood agar and MacConkey’s agar cultures using standard bacteriological procedures.15 S. aureus bacteria were identified by colony morphology, Gram staining and catalase, slide and tube coagulase and deoxyribonuclease tests.15 The cefoxitin (30.00 µg) disk diffusion method was used to detect methicillin resistance in S. aureus isolates.16 Antibiotic susceptibility was tested using the Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion method and the results interpreted using the guidelines of the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI).16 The following antibiotics were tested: ciprofloxacin (5.00 µg), clindamycin (2.00 µg), trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole (1.25 µg/23.75 µg), erythromycin (15.00 µg), gentamicin (10.00 µg), linezolid (30.00 µg), penicillin (10 U), rifampicin (5.00 µg) and teicoplanin (30.00 µg). All antibiotics were purchased from HiMedia Laboratories Ltd. (Mumbai, Maharashtra, India). An S. aureus strain (ATCC® 25923™, American Type Culture Collection, Manassas, Virginia, USA) was used as the control. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of vancomycin was determined by the agar dilution method using CLSI guidelines.17 Gradient plates of Mueller-Hinton agar were prepared with vancomycin (0.062–128.000 µg/mL). Three or four MRSA colonies grown on blood agar were picked and inoculated in Mueller-Hinton broth (MHB) and incubated at 35 °C for 4–6 hours. The turbidity of the broth culture was matched with a 0.5 McFarland standard (bacterial count ≈ 1.5 x 108 colony-forming unit [cfu]/mL) and then diluted at a ratio of 1:10 in sterile MHB to ensure a concentration of 1.5 x 107 cfu/mL. From this culture, 2 µL of the suspension was spot- inoculated on each plate and incubated at 35 °C for 24 hours. MRSA strains with MICs of ≤2.00 µg/mL, 4.00–8.00 µg/mL and ≥16.00 µg/mL were considered susceptible, intermediate and resistant to vancomycin, respectively.16 S. aureus (ATCC® 29213™, American Type Culture Collection) and Enterococcus faecalis (ATCC® 29212™, American Type Culture Collection) strains were used as vancomycin-susceptible controls. Another E. faecalis strain (ATCC® 51299™, American Type Culture Collection) was used as the vancomycin- resistant control. The MLSB phenotypes were identified as described previously.16,18 MRSA strains resistant to both erythromycin and clindamycin in routine antibiotic susceptibility testing were considered cMLSB phenotypes. A double-disk diffusion test (D-test) was performed to determine MRSA strains which were resistant to erythromycin but sensitive to clindamycin (iMLSB phenotypes). Erythromycin (15.00 µg) and clindamycin (2.00 µg) disks were placed on a Mueller- Hinton agar plate containing a lawn culture of the test isolate at a distance of 15 mm edge to edge. The plate was incubated at 35 °C for 16–18 hours. Any flattening of the zone of inhibition (D-shape) around the clindamycin disk adjacent to the erythromycin disk was subsequently observed; strains with a D-shaped zone of inhibition were considered iMLSB phenotypes. Strains of MRSA which were resistant to erythromycin, susceptible to clindamycin and were also D-test negative (had no D-shaped zone of inhibition) were considered macrolide-streptogramin B (MSB) phenotypes. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), Version 16.0 (IBM Corp., Chicago, Illinois, USA) was used to analyse the data. Rates of MRSA infections were presented as percentages. The Pearson’s Chi-squared test was used to analyse results between the two groups of categorical variables. A P value of ≤0.050 was considered statistically significant. This study was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of Kasturba Medical College (#IECKMCMLR01-14/14). Informed consent was collected from all patients prior to their participation in the study. Z2 pq 1-α d2 n = Healthcare-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Clinical characteristics and antibiotic resistance profile with emphasis on macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance e178 | SQU Medical Journal, May 2016, Volume 16, Issue 2 Results A total of 291 non-repetitive healthcare-associated-S. aureus cases were isolated during the study period; 119 and 12 cases were from the two governmental hospi- tals and 95 and 65 cases were from the two private hospitals, respectively. The rates of healthcare- associated MRSA in the two government hospitals and two private hospitals were 41.2%, 33.3%, 22.1% and 21.5%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between male and female patients. Patients aged 31–40 and 41–50 years old were most likely to be infected with MRSA. The different types of S. aureus infections found are shown in Table 1. Of the S. aureus cases, 95 (32.7%) were isolated from surgical site infections, 42 (14.4%) from cellulitis cases, 25 (8.6%) from blood stream infections (including bacteraemia and catheter-associated bacteraemia infections) and 15 (5.2%) from osteomyelitis cases. A total of 88 S. aureus cases (30.2%) were methicillin- resistant. Of the MRSA cases, 54.6% were skin and soft tissue infections, comprising cellulitis, bed sore, ulcer, burn wound, toxic epidermal necrolysis and psoas abscess infections. MRSA was significantly more frequent in bacteraemia infections while methicillin- sensitive S. aureus (MSSA) was significantly more frequent in surgical site infections (P <0.005). The antibiotic resistance patterns of the MRSA and MSSA isolates are shown in Table 2. All of the MRSA and MSSA isolates were susceptible to teicoplanin and linezolid, while the majority of MRSA isolates were resistant to ciprofloxacin (75.0%), clindamycin (51.1%), trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (59.1%) and erythromycin (62.5%). In comparison to MSSA isolates, MRSA isolates were significantly more resistant to ciprofloxacin, clindamycin, trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole, erythromycin, gentamicin and tetracycline (P <0.005). Of the MRSA strains, 84 (95.5%) were susceptible to vancomycin while four (4.6%) demonstrated inter- mediate resistance. None of the strains were resistant to vancomycin. The MIC 90 and MIC50 values of vancomycin were 2.00 µg/mL and 1.00 µg/mL, respectively. The four MRSA strains with intermediate resistance to vancomycin were isolated from four patients with osteomyelitis, an infected wound, a psoas abscess and catheter-associated bacteraemia, respectively; three of the isolates were from patients in a governmental hospital and the remaining isolate was from a patient in a private hospital. Two of the isolates with intermediate resistance to vancomycin were of the cMLSB phenotype and two were of the Table 1: Type of healthcare-associated methicillin- resistant Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin- sensitive Staphylococcus aureus infections (N = 291) Type of infection n (%) P value* MRSA (n = 88) MSSA (n = 203) Surgical site 18 (20.5) 77 (37.9) 0.004† Cellulitis 17 (19.3) 25 (12.3) 0.118 Bed sore 11 (12.5) 16 (7.9) 0.212 Catheter-associated bacteraemia 14 (15.9) 3 (1.5) <0.001† Ulcer 8 (9.1) 23 (11.3) 0.569 Burn wound 8 (9.1) 28 (13.8) 0.263 TEN 3 (3.4) 5 (2.5) 0.665 Bacteraemia 6 (6.8) 2 (1.0) 0.005† Psoas abscess 1 (1.1) 0 (0.0) 0.665 Empyema 1 (1.1) 0 (0.0) 0.665 Pneumonia 0 (0.0) 8 (3.9) 0.134 Osteomyelitis 1 (1.1) 14 (6.9) 0.041 Catheter-associated UTI 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) 0.350 TEN = toxic epidermal necrolysis; MRSA = methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; MSSA = methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus; UTI = urinary tract infection. *Determined using the Chi-squared test. †Statistically significant at P ≤0.050. Table 2: Antibiotic resistance patterns of healthcare- associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus isolates (N = 291) Antibiotic n (%) P value* Resistant MRSA isolates (n = 88) Resistant MSSA isolates (n =203) Ciprofloxacin 66 (75.0) 68 (33.5) <0.001† Clindamycin 45 (51.1) 33 (16.3) <0.001† Trimethoprim/ sulfamethoxazole 52 (59.1) 59 (29.1) <0.001† Erythromycin 55 (62.5) 64 (31.5) <0.001† Gentamicin 37 (42.1) 22 (10.8) <0.001† Linezolid 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) - Penicillin 88 (100.0) 181 (89.2) 0.001† Rifampicin 1 (1.1) 0 (0.0) 0.128 Teicoplanin 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) - Tetracycline 33 (37.5) 37 (18.2) <0.001† MRSA = methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; MSSA = methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. *Determined using the Chi-squared test. †Statistically significant at P ≤0.050. Jyoti Kumari, Shalini M. Shenoy, Shrikala Baliga, Chakrapani M. and Gopalkrishna K. Bhat Clinical and Basic Research | e179 MSB phenotype. A total of 10 MRSA isolates (11.4%) were resistant to both erythromycin and clindamycin (cMLSB phenotype), while 45 (51.1%) were resistant to erythromycin but susceptible to clindamycin. Of these 45 strains, 31 (68.9%) were D-test positive (iMLSB phenotype) and 14 (31.1%) were D-test negative (MSB phenotype). The remaining 33 MRSA isolates (37.5%) were sensitive to both clindamycin and erythromycin. The MLSB phenotypes of the MRSA isolates from the four hospitals are shown in Table 3. Discussion Considerable geographical variation exists in the prev- alence of healthcare-associated MRSA infections.2–4 The present study revealed a high cumulative rate of health-associated MRSA infections among patients admitted to four tertiary care hospitals in Mangalore. However, the rate was lower than the 41% national prevalence rate reported by the Indian Network for Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance (INSAR) Group based on data collected from 15 tertiary centres.8 Nevertheless, the rate in the present study was higher than that that reported from the same four hospitals in a previous study in 2011 (25.25%).7 Akoğlu et al. reported a higher rate of healthcare-associated MRSA in Turkey (71.5%) while the Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance reported a similar rate (30.3%) to that of the current study.19,20 However, it is important to note that the current study included patients with potential predisposing risk factors to healthcare-associated MRSA infections, including previous surgeries/trauma, the presence of indwelling devices such as catheters and lengthy hospital stays.12 In terms of gender predilection, no significant difference was found between male and female patients in the current study; this observation is in agreement with previous research.21 A significantly greater number of healthcare- associated MRSA isolates in the current study were resistant to non-β-lactam antibiotics in comparison with healthcare-associated MSSA isolates. A similar observation was made by the INSAR Group.8 This could be due to the unique molecular properties of MRSA bacteria—these strains carry the staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec), a mobile genetic element which includes the mecA gene that codes for methicillin resistance.22 Healthcare-associated MRSA carries SCCmec types I, II or III; these elements are relatively large and are associated with resistance to many other non-β-lactam antibiotics.22 This kind of multidrug resistance is challenging for clinicians when selecting an appropriate antibiotic for treatment. Among different phenotypes of MLSB resistance, detection of cMLSB does not pose a problem because these strains are resistant to both erythromycin and clindamycin in routine susceptibility testing; however, the detection of iMLSB and MSB phenotypes is not possible with standard methods because these strains appear resistant to erythromycin but susceptible to clindamycin.10 Hence, clindamycin treatment will fail with iMLSB MRSA strains. 10 Conversely, if clindamycin is not considered as a treatment option due to the suspicion that the strain might be resistant, patients with clindamycin-susceptible infections would be deprived of the correct antibiotic. In the present study, more than a third of the MRSA isolates were of the iMLSB phenotype; this finding is higher than those reported from previous Indian studies.7,23 Studies from other parts of the world have shown iMLSB phenotype rates ranging from 7.1–56%.24–26 These results clearly support the use of a D-test to identify healthcare- associated MRSA strains with iMLSB resistance. Vancomycin is considered an appropriate antibio- tic for the treatment of serious MRSA infections and its use has increased dramatically over the past 20 years due to the emergence of multidrug-resistant healthcare-associated MRSA.9,27 However, the recent emergence of vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (VISA) and vancomycin-resistant S. aureus (VRSA) infections has added to the difficulty in selecting the appropriate antibiotic for these bacteria.1 Several reports of MRSA infections with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin have been reported from France, Japan, Korea, Germany and the USA.27 While VRSA infections are not yet a problem in India, VISA strains have been reported from some centres.28,29 There were four VISA cases observed in the present study; however, routine testing does not differentiate between VISA and vancomycin-susceptible strains.16,17 In the Table 3: Macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B phenotypes among patients with healthcare-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections (N = 88) Hospital n (%) cMLSB phenotype iMLSB phenotype MSB phenotype Government hospital 1 6 (6.8) 23 (26.1) 8 (9.1) Government hospital 2 1 (1.1) 1 (1.1) 0 (0.0) Private hospital 1 1 (1.1) 4 (4.5) 3 (3.4) Private hospital 2 2 (2.3) 3 (3.4) 3 (3.4) Total* 10 (11.4) 31 (35.2) 14 (15.9) MLS B = macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B; cMLSB = constitutive MLSB ; iMLSB = inducible MLSB ; MSB = macrolide-streptogramin B. *The remaining 33 isolates were sensitive to both clindamycin and erythromycin. present study, it was observed that agar dilution was useful in determining the vancomycin MIC and also contributed to differentiating VISA from vancomycin- susceptible strains. Tandel et al. have previously shown that the Etest® (bioMérieux, Marcy-l’Étoile, Lyon, France) can also be used for this purpose.30 Determining the MIC of vancomycin is required before selecting this antibiotic for the treatment of a healthcare-associated MRSA infection. Fortunately, all MRSA strains were susceptible to linezolid, leaving it as the choice of treatment in these cases. Molecular testing was not performed on the MRSA isolates and was therefore a limitation of the present study. There is an urgent need for further studies on the judicious use of vancomycin and the surveillance of antibiotic resistance. In addition, strategies need to be implemented in order to prevent healthcare- associated infections in India. Conclusion A high rate of healthcare-associated MRSA infections was observed, indicating that this type of infection is a significant concern for the four hospitals included in this study. A greater number of MRSA cases were multidrug-resistant as compared with MSSA. A D-test should be performed before selecting clindamycin to treat cases of MRSA that appear susceptible to clindamycin but are resistant to erythromycin according to standard antibiotic susceptibility testing. The MIC of vancomycin should be determined and susceptibility should be proven before consider- ing this antibiotic for the treatment of serious MRSA infections. c o n f l i c t o f i n t e r e s t The authors declare no conflicts of interest. References 1. DeLeo FR, Chambers HF. Reemergence of antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the genomics era. J Clin Invest 2009; 119:2464–74. doi: 10.1172/JCI38226. 2. Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA, Schmitz FJ, Smayevsky J, Bell J, Jones RN, et al. Survey of infections due to Staphylococcus species: Frequency of occurrence and antimicrobial susceptibility of isolates collected in the United States, Canada, Latin America, Europe, and the Western Pacific region for the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 1997-1999. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32:S114–32. doi: 10.1086/320184. 3. Tiemersma EW, Bronzwaer SL, Lyytikäinen O, Degener JE, Schrijnemakers P, Bruinsma N, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Europe, 1999-2002. Emerg Infect Dis 2004; 10:1627–34. 4. Song JH, Hsueh PR, Chung DR, Ko KS, Kang CI, Peck KR, et al. Spread of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus between the community and the hospitals in Asian countries: An ANSORP study. J Antimicrob Chemother 2011; 66:1061–9. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkr024. 5. Tahnkiwale SS, Roy S, Jalgaonkar SV. Methicillin resistance among isolates of Staphylococcus aureus: Antibiotic sensitivity pattern & phage typing. Indian J Med Sci 2002; 56:330–4. 6. Bouchiat C, El-Zeenni N, Chakrakodi B, Nagaraj S, Arakere G, Etienne J. Epidemiology of Staphylococcus aureus in Bangalore, India: Emergence of the ST217 clone and high rate of resistance to erythromycin and ciprofloxacin in the community. New Microbes New Infect 2015; 7:15–20. doi: 10.1016/j. nmni.2015.05.003. 7. Sharma NK, Garg R, Baliga S, Bhat KG. Nosocomial infections and drug susceptibility patterns in methicillin sensitive and methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Diagn Res 2013; 7:2178–80. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2013/6750.3463. 8. Indian Network for Surveillance of Antimicrobial Resistance (INSAR) Group, India. Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in India: Prevalence & susceptibility pattern. Indian J Med Res 2013; 137:363–9. 9. Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, Daum RS, Fridkin SK, Gorwitz RJ, et al. Clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children: Executive summary. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 52:285–92. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir034. 10. Leclercq R. Mechanism of resistance to macrolides and lincosamides: Nature of the resistant elements and their clinical implications. Clin Infect Dis 2002; 34:482–92. doi: 10.1086/324626. 11. David MZ, Daum RS. Community-associated methicillin- resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Epidemiology and clinical consequences of an emerging epidemic. Clin Microbiol Rev 2010; 23:616–87. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00081-09. 12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CDC/NHSN surveillance definition for specific types of infection. From: w w w.cdc .gov/nhsn/PDFs/ps cManual/17ps cNosInfD ef_ current.pdf Accessed: Feb 2016. 13. Mahajan BK. Methods in Biostatistics: For Medical Students and Research Workers, 8th ed. New Delhi, India: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers Ltd., 2016. Pp. 113–27. doi: 10.50 05/jp/books/12646. 14. Rashid A, Rashid H, Qureshi UR, Rashid A. Conquering methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Prespectives and treatment options. Int Arch Med 2015; 8:1–7. doi: 10.3823/1666. 15. Bannerman TL. Staphylococci, Micrococcus, and other catalase positive cocci that grow aerobically. In: Murray PR, Baron EJ, Jorgenson JH, Pfaller MA, Yolken RH (Eds). Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 8th ed. Washington DC, USA: ASM Press, 2003. Pp. 384–404. 16. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. M100-S25: Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing - Twenty-fifth informational supplement. From: http://shop.clsi. org/microbiology-documents/ Accessed: Feb 2016. 17. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. M100-S22: Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing - Twenty-second informational supplement. From: http://shop. clsi.org/microbiology-documents/ Accessed: Feb 2016. 18. Steward CD, Raney PM, Morrell AK, Williams PP, McDougal LK, Jevitt L, et al. Testing for induction of clindamycin resistance in erythromycin-resistant isolates of Staphylococcus aureus. J Clin Microbiol 2005; 43:1716–21. doi: 10.1128/JCM.43.4.1716- 1721.2005. Healthcare-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Clinical characteristics and antibiotic resistance profile with emphasis on macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance 180 | SQU Medical Journal, May 2016, Volume 16, Issue 2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1172/JCI38226 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/320184 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkr024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nmni.2015.05.003 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nmni.2015.05.003 http://dx.doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2013/6750.3463 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/cir034 http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/324626 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00081-09 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp/books/12646 http://dx.doi.org/10.5005/jp/books/12646 http://dx.doi.org/10.3823/1666 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.43.4.1716-1721.2005 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.43.4.1716-1721.2005 Jyoti Kumari, Shalini M. Shenoy, Shrikala Baliga, Chakrapani M. and Gopalkrishna K. Bhat Clinical and Basic Research | e181 19. Akoğlu H, Zarakolu P, Altun B, Ünal S. [Epidemiological and molecular characteristics of hospital-acquired methicillin- resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains isolated in Hacettepe University Adult Hospital in 2004-2005.] Mikrobiyol Bul 2010; 44:343–55. 20. Coombs GW, Nimmo GR, Pearson JC, Collignon PJ, Bell JM, McLaws ML, et al.; Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance. Australian Group on Antimicrobial Resistance Hospital-onset Staphylococcus aureus Surveillance Programme annual report, 2011. Commun Dis Intell Q Rep 2013; 37:E210–18. 21. Abbas A, Nirwan PS, Srivastava P. Prevalence and antibiogram of hospital acquired-methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus and community acquired-methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus at a tertiary care hospital National Institute of Medical Sciences. Community Acquir Infect 2015; 2:13–15. doi: 10.4103/2225-6482.153857. 22. Hiramatsu K, Katayama Y, Yuzawa H, Ito T. Molecular genetics of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Int J Med Microbiol 2002; 292:67–74. doi: 10.1078/1438-4221-00192. 23. Chadha T, Kulsum SN, Adlekha S, Mailapur PC. Comparison of antibiotic susceptibility pattern of community- and hospital- associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with special reference to inducible clindamycin resistance in a tertiary care hospital in southern India. Med J D Y Patil Univ 2014; 7:439–42. doi: 10.4103/0975-2870.135257. 24. Schmitz FJ, Sadurski R, Kray A, Boos M, Geisel R, Köhrer K, et al. Prevalence of macrolide-resistance genes in Staphylo- coccus aureus and Enterococcus faecium isolates from 24 European university hospitals. J Antimicrob Chemother 2000; 45:891–4. doi: 10.1093/jac/45.6.891. 25. Schreckenberger PC, Ilendo E, Ristow KL. Incidence of constitutive and inducible clindamycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci in a community and a tertiary care hospital. J Clin Microbiol 2004; 42:2777–9. doi: 10.1128/JCM.42.6.2777-2779.2004. 26. Patel M, Waites KB, Moser SA, Cloud GA, Hoesley CJ. Prevalence of inducible clindamycin resistance among community- and hospital- associated Staphylococcus aureus isolates. J Clin Microbiol 2006; 44:2481–4. doi: 10.1128/ JCM.02582-05. 27. Loomba PS, Tanjea J, Mishra B. Methicillin and vancomycin resistant S. aureus in hospitalized patients. J Glob Infect Dis 2010; 2:275–83. doi: 10.4103/0974-777X.68535. 28. Thati V, Shivannavar CT, Gaddad SM. Vancomycin resistance among methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from intensive care units of tertiary care hospitals in Hyderabad. Indian J Med Res 2011; 134:704–8. doi: 10.4103/0971-5916. 91001. 29. Dhawan B, Gadepalli R, Rao C, Kapil A, Sreenivas V. Decreased susceptibility to vancomycin in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: A 5 year study in an Indian tertiary hospital. J Med Microbiol 2010; 59:375–6. doi: 10.1099/jmm. 0.011940-0. 30. Tandel K, Praharaj AK, Kumar S. Differences in vancomycin MIC among MRSA isolates by agar dilution and E test method. Indian J Med Microbiol 2012; 30:453–5. doi: 10.4103/0255- 0857.103768. http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2225-6482.153857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1078/1438-4221-00192 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0975-2870.135257 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/45.6.891 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.42.6.2777-2779.2004 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02582-05 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.02582-05 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-777X.68535 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0971-5916.91001 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0971-5916.91001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.011940-0 http://dx.doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.011940-0 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0255-0857.103768 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0255-0857.103768