Comparison of multiple-locus variable-number tandem repeat analysis and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis in a setting of polyclonal endemicity of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium.

摘要

In order to assess whether multiple-locus-variable number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) could replace pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) for genotyping vancomycin-resistant isolates of Enterococcus faecium (VREF), this study compared the typeability, discriminatory power, concordance and costs of these methods for VREF isolates obtained from patients, environmental samples and the hands of healthcare workers (HCWs) in a medical intensive care unit (ICU) where VREF was endemic. Over a 58-day period, 393 VREF isolates (373 vanA, one vanA/B, 19 vanB) were cultured from patient rectal swabs (n = 76), the environment (n = 270) and the hands of HCWs (n = 47). PFGE was able to divide 358 (91.1%) isolates into 19 PFGE types (>six bands different) and 24 subtypes (one to three bands different). MLVA was able to type 391 (99.5%) isolates into 11 genotypes. The discriminatory power of PFGE subtypes was 83%, as compared to 68% for MLVA. Concordance between the two methods, based on matched or mismatched MLVA types and PFGE types or subtypes, was 67.5% and 82.8%, respectively. Using PFGE, 13 isolates could be genotyped in 3 days; MLVA genotyped 94 isolates in 2 days. For both methods, the estimated costs were Euro 7 (Dollars 10)/isolate. PFGE and MLVA produced highly concordant results when assigning genotypes to nosocomial VREF isolates. MLVA was faster, but PFGE subtyping was more discriminatory.