These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: [A study of resistance to antiseptics of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in gastroenterological surgery]. Author: Takesue Y, Yokoyama T, Kodama T, Imamura Y, Murakami Y, Sewake H, Matsuura Y. Journal: Nihon Geka Gakkai Zasshi; 1991 Feb; 92(2):113-7. PubMed ID: 2038285. Abstract: Highly methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (H-MRSA, MIC greater than 100 micrograms/ml) was prevalent from 1986 in our institution. The failure of povidone-iodine to reduce the prevalence of MRSA led us to choose chlorhexidine-ethanol solution as an antiseptic, and then the isolation frequency of H-MRSA decreased significantly in 1988. When H-MRSA began to increase again recently, we studied the resistance to antiseptics of MRSA in order to investigate the cause of this re-increase. Common antiseptics were tested against 45 strains of H-MRSA and 22 strains of methicillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA, MIC less than 12.5 micrograms/ml). Dilute preparations (1:100) of povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine-ethanol solution were more effective on H-MRSA than the other antiseptics. Though there was no significant difference between H-MRSA and MSSA in their sensitivity to povidone-iodine, the killing of H-MRSA strains was more delayed than the killing of MSSA strains in chlorhexidine. Even after a 120-second exposure, 13.3% of H-MRSA strains were resistant to chlorhexidine (more than 1000 colonies were recovered). These highly chlorhexidine-resistant strains have been isolated since 1987 when we chose chlorhexidine-ethanol solution as the antiseptic in our institution. Therefore we suspect that the acquirement of resistance to antiseptics by H-MRSA caused the re-increase of this strain.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]