| Title |
Staphylococcus pseudintermedius can be misdiagnosed as Staphylococcus aureus in humans with dog bite wounds
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, December 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10096-014-2300-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
S. Börjesson, E. Gómez-Sanz, K. Ekström, C. Torres, U. Grönlund |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether S. pseudintermedius is misdiagnosed as S. aureus by clinical laboratories when isolated from humans with dog bite wounds. In addition, we attempted to determine whether S. pseudintermedius isolates related to dog bite wounds share phenotypic and genotypic traits. S. pseudintermedius was identified by PCR targeting the nuc gene. Isolates were tested for antibiotic susceptibility using VetMIC GP-mo microdilution panels. The occurrence of genes encoding leukocidins, exfoliatins, pyrogenic toxin superantigens and enterotoxins was determined by PCR. The relatedness of S. pseudintermedius isolates was investigated using Multi Locus Sequence Typing (MLST). Out of 101 isolates defined as S. aureus by human clinical microbiology laboratories, 13 isolates were re-identified as S. pseudintermedius and one isolate was confirmed to carry the mecA gene, i.e. methicillin-resistant (MRSP). The MRSP isolate was also defined as multi-resistant. Two methicillin-susceptible S. pseudintermedius isolates were also multi-resistant and five were susceptible to all antibiotics tested. With the exception of three S. pseudintermedius isolates belonging to multi locus sequence type (MLST) 158, all the isolates belonged to unique STs. All isolates contained lukS/F-I, siet and se-int, and expA were identified in two isolates and expB and sec canine-sel in one isolate respectively. S. pseudintermedius is frequently misdiagnosed as S. aureus from humans with dog bite wounds showing that it can act as an opportunistic pathogen in humans. No common phenotypic and genotypic traits shared by the S. pseudintermedius isolates could be identified. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sri Lanka | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 88 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 25 | 28% |
| Unknown | 15 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 17 | 19% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 14 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 7% |
| Unknown | 19 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,968,145
of 22,775,504 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#117
of 2,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,253
of 352,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#1
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,775,504 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 352,836 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.