Staphylococcus aureus has long been recognised as an important pathogen in human disease. Serious staphylococcal infections can frequently occur in inpatients and may lead to dire consequences, especially as to therapy with antimicrobial agents. The increase in the frequency of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) as the causal agent of nosocomial infection and the possibility of emergence of resistance to vancomycin demands a quick and trustworthy characterization of isolates and identification of clonal spread within hospitals. Enough information must be generated to permit the implementation of appropriate measures for control of infection, so that outbreaks can be contained. Molecular typing techniques reviewed in this manuscript include: plasmid profile analysis, analysis of chromosomal DNA after enzymatic restriction, Southern blotting, pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), techniques involving polymerase chain reaction and multilocus sequence typing (MLST). Repetitive DNA Sequence PCR (rep-PCR) may be used for screening due to its practicality, low cost and reproducibility. Because of its high discriminatory power Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis (PFGE) still remains the gold standard for MRSA typing. New techniques with higher reproducibility and discriminatory power, such as Multi-Locus Sequence Typing (MLST), are appearing. These are mostly useful for global epidemiology studies. Molecular typing techniques are invaluable tools for the assessment of putative MRSA outbreaks and so should be extensively used for this purpose.

Over a period of 7 months, 151 consecutive methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus blood isolates were evaluated. None was community acquired. Twenty (13%) were susceptible to four or more antimicrobials, and 95% of these isolates were identified as SCCmec type IV. Molecular typing demonstrated four patterns, with one predominant pattern. Although usually community acquired, SCCmec type IV in our setting is clearly nosocomial.

No abstract

Several COVID-19 vaccines have shown good efficacy in clinical trials, but there remains uncertainty about the efficacy of vaccines against different variants. Here, we investigate the efficacy of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222) against symptomatic COVID-19 in a post-hoc exploratory analysis of a Phase 3 randomised trial in Brazil (trial registration ISRCTN89951424). Nose and throat swabs were tested by PCR in symptomatic participants. Sequencing and genotyping of swabs were performed to determine the lineages of SARS-CoV-2 circulating during the study. Protection against any symptomatic COVID-19 caused by the Zeta (P.2) variant was assessed in 153 cases with vaccine efficacy (VE) of 69% (95% CI 55, 78). 49 cases of B.1.1.28 occurred and VE was 73% (46, 86). The Gamma (P.1) variant arose later in the trial and fewer cases (N = 18) were available for analysis. VE was 64% (−2, 87). ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 provided 95% protection (95% CI 61%, 99%) against hospitalisation due to COVID-19. In summary, we report that ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 protects against emerging variants in Brazil despite the presence of the spike protein mutation E484K.

"Classical" risk factors do not apply to patients infected with the SCCmec type IV strain of MRSA, which is an important cause of nosocomial bacteremia. This strain infects a patient population that is less ill and has had less frequent invasive procedures than a patient population infected with the multidrug-resistant strain of SCCmec type III MRSA. We found that virulence factors were rare and that Panton-Valentine leukocidin was absent. There were multiple clones of the SCCmec type IV strain in our hospital. Children under 1 year of age were at a higher risk. There was a predominant clone (sequence type 5) in this patient population.