Bellato, Alessandro

Nebbia, Patrizia

Robino, Patrizia

Scalas, Daniela

Stella, Maria Cristina

English

Institutional Research Information System University of Turin

17 October 2023AperTO - Archivio Istituzionale Open Access dell'Università di TorinoOriginal Citation:Comparison of in vitro activity (MIC) of seven antibiotics for exclusive use in humans betweenStaphylococcus pseudintermedius and Staphylococcus aureusTerms of use:Open Access(Article begins on next page)Anyone can freely access the full text of works made available as "Open Access". Works made availableunder a Creative Commons license can be used according to the terms and conditions of said license. Useof all other works requires consent of the right holder (author or publisher) if not exempted from copyrightprotection by the applicable law.Availability:This is the author's manuscriptThis version is available http://hdl.handle.net/2318/1839394 since 2022-02-08T15:52:41ZComparison of in vitro activity (MIC) of seven antibiotics for exclusive use in humans between Staphylococcus pseudintermedius and Staphylococcus aureusA. Bellato, P. Robino, M.C. Stella, D. Scalas, L. Scarrone, P. Nebbia1. Evaluating the MIC of seven A-category antibiotics (AMEG), namelyCeftaroline, Daptomycin, Linezolid, Quinupristin-Dalfopristin, Teicoplanin, Telavancin, Vancomycin, against S. pseudintermedius 2. Comparing our results with MIC distributions reported by EUCAST for S. aureusAim of the studyS. pseudintermedius is a widespread pathogen of companion animals and manystrains carry multiple resistances (Lynch and Helbig, 2021)Its identification and treatment are made hard due to difficulties in recognition from other Staphylococcus intermedius group staphylococci (Murugaiyan et al., 2014)Occasional infection of pet owners by S. pseudintermedius has been reported(Somayaji et al., 2016; Lozano et al., 2017)BackgroundMaterials and methods40 clinical samples (31 dogs and 5 cats) from Turin University Veterinary Hospital during two years (July 2019 – May 2021)Reason for admission: 21 orthopedic surgeries (52.5%), 9 dermatitis (22.5%),  5 soft-tissues surgeries (12.5%), 5 urinary disorders (12.5%)SamplingStatistical analysisVisual evaluation of MIC and log2(MIC) distributionsComparison of MIC weighted mean between S. pseudintermedius (our sample) and S. aureus (EUCAST) by non-parametric tests (Wilcoxon rank-sum)Adjustment for multiple comparisons (Storey, 2010)Species identification and ASTMALDI-TOF identification confirmed by nuc gene PCR (Sasaki et al. 2010)MIC measured by E-Tests (Liofilchem)Figure 1. Distributions of log2(MIC) for S. aureus (EUCAST, n = 40609 ± 32124.69) and S. pseudintermedius (oursample, n = 40). Data are presented as percentagesResults 1/2ECOFF S. aureusOnly one population of S. pseudintermedius identified, thus it was not possible to differentiate between wild-type and resistant strainsThe log2(MIC) values of Daptomycin, Linezolid, Quinu-Dalfopristin, and Telavancin were higher for S. aureus than S. pseudintermedius (p < 0.001)The log2(MIC) of Teicoplanin was higher for S. pseudintermedius than S. aureus (p = 0.003)No difference was observed in the log2(MIC) of Ceftaroline and Vancomycin.Results 2/2Discussion and conclusionReferring to S. aureus ECOFFs, isolated S. pseudintermedius likely belong to wild typefor all antibiotics but CeftarolineNonetheless, about Teicoplanin, Vancomycin, Quinu-Dalfopristin and Linezolid some concerns are advisable since strains are susceptible to the upper-limit concentration• Lynch, S.A., and Helbig, K.J. (2021). The Complex Diseases of Staphylococcus pseudintermedius in Canines: Where to Next? Veterinary Sciences 8, 11.• Murugaiyan, J., Walther, B., Stamm, I., Abou-Elnaga, Y., Brueggemann-Schwarz, S., Vincze, S., Wieler, L.H., Lübke-Becker, A., Semmler, T., Roesler, U. (2014). Species differentiation within the Staphylococcus intermedius group using a refined MALDI-TOF MS database. Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 20, 1007-1014.• Decristophoris, P., Fasola, A., Benaglia, C., Tonolla, M., Petrini, O. (2011). Identification of Staphylococcus intermedius Group by MALDI-TOF MS. Systematic and Applied Microbiology, 34, 45–51.• Somayaji, R., Priyantha, M.A.R., Rubin, J.E., Church, D. (2016). Human infections due to Staphylococcus pseudintermedius, an emerging zoonosis of canine origin: report of 24 cases. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, 85, 471-476.• Lozano, C., Rezusta, A., Ferrer, I., Pérez-Laguna, V., Zarazaga, M., Ruiz-Lipa, L.., Revillo, M.J., Torres, C. (2017). Staphylococcus pseudintermedius Human Infection Cases in Spain: Dog-to-Human Transmission. Vector borne and zoonotic diseases, 17, 260-270. • Sasaki, T., Tsubakishita, S., Tanaka, Y., Sakusabe, A., Ohtsuka, M., Hirotaki, S., Kawakami, T., Fukata, T., Hiramatsu, K. (2010). Multiplex-PCR Method for Species Identification of Coagulase-Positive Staphylococci. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 48, 765-769.• Storey, J.D. (2003). The positive false discovery rate: a Bayesian interpretation and the q-value. The annals of statistics, 31, 2013-2035.• https://mic.eucast.org/ last access 21/07/2021.Βibliography

Comparison of in vitro activity (MIC) of seven antibiotics for exclusive use in humans between Staphylococcus pseudintermedius and Staphylococcus aureus

https://iris.unito.it/bitstream/2318/1839394/1/Bellato_poster.pdf

Comparison of in vitro activity (MIC) of seven antibiotics for exclusive use in humans between Staphylococcus pseudintermedius and Staphylococcus aureus

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Institutional Research Information System University of Turin