Outbreak of Mupirocin-Resistant Staphylococci in a Hospital in Warsaw, Poland, Due to Plasmid Transmission and Clonal Spread of Several Strains

摘要

An outbreak of mupirocin-resistant (MuR) staphylococci was investigated in two wards of a large hospital in Warsaw, Poland. Fifty-three MuR isolates of Staphylococcus aureus, S. epidermidis, S. haemolyticus, S. xylosus, and S. capitis were identified over a 17-month survey which was carried out after introduction of the drug for the treatment of skin infections. The isolates were collected from patients with infections, environmental samples, and carriers; they constituted 19.5% of all staphylococcal isolates identified in the two wards during that time. Almost all the MuR isolates were also resistant to methicillin (methicillin-resistant S. aureus and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci). Seven of the outbreak isolates expressed a low-level-resistance phenotype (MuL), whereas the remaining majority of isolates were found to be highly resistant to mupirocin (MuH). The mupA gene, responsible for the MuH phenotype, has been assigned to three different polymorphic loci among the strains in the collection analyzed. The predominant polymorph, polymorph I (characterized by a mupA-containingEcoRI DNA fragment of about 16 kb), was located on a specific plasmid which was widely distributed among the entire staphylococcal population. All MuR S. aureus isolates were found to represent a single epidemic strain, which was clonally disseminated in both wards. The S. epidermidis population was much more diverse; however, at least four clusters of closely related isolates were identified, which suggested that some strains of this species were also clonally spread in the hospital environment. Six isolates of S. epidermidis were demonstrated to express the MuL and MuH resistance mechanisms simultaneously, and this is the first identification of such dual MuR phenotype-bearing strains. The outbreak was attributed to a high level and inappropriate use of mupirocin, and as a result the dermatological formulation of the drug has been removed from the hospital formulary.