Forskning
Udskriv Udskriv
Switch language
Region Hovedstaden - en del af Københavns Universitetshospital
Udgivet

Implications of identifying the recently defined members of the Staphylococcus aureus complex S. argenteus and S. schweitzeri: A position paper of members of the ESCMID Study Group for staphylococci and Staphylococcal Diseases (ESGS)

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

DOI

  1. Oral amoxicillin and amoxicillin–clavulanic acid: properties, indications, and usage

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftReviewForskningpeer review

  2. Understanding the microbiome of diabetic foot osteomyelitis: insights from molecular and microscopic approaches

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  3. Multicentre determination of rezafungin (CD101) susceptibility of Candida species by the EUCAST method

    Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

  • Karsten Becker
  • Frieder Schaumburg
  • Angela Kearns
  • Anders R Larsen
  • Jodi A Lindsay
  • Robert L Skov
  • Henrik Westh
Vis graf over relationer

Background: Staphylococcus argenteus and Staphylococcus schweitzeri, previously known as divergent Staphylococcus aureus clonal lineages, have been recently established as novel, difficult-to-delimit, coagulase-positive species within the S. aureus complex. Methicillin-resistant strains of S. argenteus are known from Australia and the UK. Knowledge of their epidemiology, medical significance and transmission risk is limited and partly contradictory, hampering definitive recommendations. There is mounting evidence that the pathogenicity of S. argenteus is similar to that of ‘classical’ S. aureus, while as yet no S. schweitzeri infections have been reported. Aim: To provide decision support on whether and how to distinguish and report both species. Sources: PubMed, searched for S. argenteus and S. schweitzeri. Content: This position paper reviews the main characteristics of both species and draws conclusions for microbiological diagnostics and surveillance as well as infection prevention and control measures. Implications: We propose not distinguishing within the S. aureus complex for routine reporting purposes until there is evidence that pathogenicity or clinical outcome differ markedly between the different species. Primarily for research purposes, suitably equipped laboratories are encouraged to differentiate between S. argenteus and S. schweitzeri. Caution is urged if these novel species are explicitly reported. In such cases, a specific comment should be added (i.e. ‘member of the S.aureus complex’) to prevent confusion with less- or non-pathogenic staphylococci. Prioritizing aspects of patient safety, methicillin-resistant isolates should be handled as recommended for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In these cases, the clinician responsible should be directly contacted and informed by the diagnosing microbiological laboratory, as they would be for MRSA. Research is warranted to clarify the epidemiology, clinical impact and implications for infection control of such isolates.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftClinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases
Vol/bind25
Udgave nummer9
Sider (fra-til)1064-1070
Antal sider7
ISSN1198-743X
DOI
StatusUdgivet - sep. 2019

Bibliografisk note

Copyright © 2019 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

ID: 56832642