What are the most effective treatments for MRSA infections. How do antibiotics like vancomycin and daptomycin compare in treating MRSA bacteremia. What emerging therapies show promise against drug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains. How can healthcare providers optimize MRSA treatment regimens for better patient outcomes.

Understanding MRSA: A Challenging Bacterial Infection

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a formidable bacterial strain that has developed resistance to many common antibiotics. This resistance makes MRSA infections particularly challenging to treat, often requiring specialized antimicrobial therapies.

MRSA can cause a wide range of infections, from skin and soft tissue infections to more severe conditions like bacteremia (bloodstream infections) and endocarditis (heart valve infections). The increasing prevalence of MRSA in both healthcare and community settings has made it a significant public health concern.

Key Characteristics of MRSA:

• Resistant to methicillin and other beta-lactam antibiotics
• Can spread rapidly in healthcare facilities
• Often requires treatment with “last-resort” antibiotics
• Associated with higher morbidity and mortality rates compared to methicillin-susceptible S. aureus

Vancomycin: The Traditional First-Line Treatment

For many years, vancomycin has been the cornerstone of MRSA treatment, particularly for severe infections like bacteremia. However, emerging research has raised concerns about its efficacy in certain situations.

Is vancomycin still an effective option for MRSA infections? While vancomycin remains a valuable treatment option, its effectiveness may be diminishing in some cases. A systematic review and meta-analysis by Kalil et al. found an association between higher vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and increased mortality in patients with S. aureus bloodstream infections.

Optimizing Vancomycin Therapy:

To maximize the effectiveness of vancomycin treatment, healthcare providers must carefully monitor drug levels and adjust dosing accordingly. Neely et al. investigated whether traditional vancomycin trough concentrations were adequate for optimal dosing. Their findings suggest that more sophisticated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling may be necessary to achieve optimal therapeutic outcomes.

Daptomycin: A Powerful Alternative for MRSA Bacteremia

Daptomycin has emerged as a potent alternative to vancomycin for treating MRSA bacteremia. This lipopeptide antibiotic offers several advantages over traditional therapies.

How does daptomycin compare to vancomycin in treating MRSA bloodstream infections? A landmark study by Fowler et al. demonstrated that daptomycin was non-inferior to standard therapy (primarily vancomycin) for S. aureus bacteremia and right-sided endocarditis. Moreover, daptomycin showed a trend towards better outcomes in patients with MRSA infections.

Advantages of Daptomycin:

• Rapid bactericidal activity
• Once-daily dosing
• Potentially more effective against MRSA strains with reduced vancomycin susceptibility
• Lower risk of nephrotoxicity compared to vancomycin

Recent studies have further supported the use of daptomycin in specific clinical scenarios. Moore et al. found that daptomycin was associated with improved outcomes compared to vancomycin in patients with MRSA bloodstream infections caused by isolates with high vancomycin MICs. Similarly, Murray et al. demonstrated that early use of daptomycin in such cases led to better clinical outcomes.

Teicoplanin: An Alternative Glycopeptide Antibiotic

Teicoplanin, another glycopeptide antibiotic, has been used as an alternative to vancomycin in some regions, particularly in Europe and Asia. While not as widely used as vancomycin in the United States, teicoplanin offers some potential advantages.

How does teicoplanin compare to vancomycin for MRSA infections? A Cochrane review by Cavalcanti et al. found no significant differences in efficacy between teicoplanin and vancomycin for proven or suspected infections. However, teicoplanin was associated with a lower risk of nephrotoxicity.

A multicenter prospective observational study by Yoon et al. specifically compared vancomycin and teicoplanin in patients with healthcare-associated MRSA bacteremia. The study found similar clinical outcomes between the two treatments, with teicoplanin showing a more favorable safety profile.

Potential Advantages of Teicoplanin:

• Lower risk of nephrotoxicity
• Longer half-life, allowing for less frequent dosing
• Potential for outpatient administration

Emerging Therapies: Telavancin and Ceftaroline

As MRSA continues to evolve and develop resistance to existing antibiotics, researchers are exploring new treatment options. Two promising agents in this category are telavancin and ceftaroline.

Telavancin: A Novel Lipoglycopeptide

Telavancin is a semisynthetic lipoglycopeptide antibiotic with potent activity against MRSA. It exhibits a dual mechanism of action, inhibiting cell wall synthesis and disrupting bacterial membrane integrity.

What is the potential role of telavancin in treating MRSA infections? The ASSURE study, a randomized Phase 2 trial by Stryjewski et al., evaluated telavancin versus standard therapy in patients with uncomplicated S. aureus bacteremia. While the study was not powered to demonstrate superiority, telavancin showed comparable efficacy to standard treatment.

A Phase 3 trial (NCT02208063) is currently underway to further evaluate telavancin’s efficacy in S. aureus bacteremia, including MRSA infections. This study may provide more definitive evidence on telavancin’s role in managing severe MRSA infections.

Ceftaroline: A Novel Cephalosporin

Ceftaroline is a fifth-generation cephalosporin with activity against MRSA, representing a significant advance in beta-lactam antibiotics. Its unique ability to bind to penicillin-binding protein 2a (PBP2a) allows it to overcome the primary mechanism of methicillin resistance in S. aureus.

How does ceftaroline’s mechanism of action differ from other anti-MRSA antibiotics? Otero et al. elucidated the molecular basis of ceftaroline’s activity against MRSA. The drug induces an allosteric change in PBP2a, allowing it to bind and inhibit this crucial enzyme in cell wall synthesis.

While ceftaroline has shown promise in treating MRSA infections, its role in managing severe infections like bacteremia is still being defined. Ongoing research and clinical experience will help determine its optimal place in MRSA treatment algorithms.

Combination Therapy: Enhancing Treatment Efficacy

In some cases, particularly for severe or complicated MRSA infections, combination therapy may be considered to enhance treatment efficacy and prevent the emergence of resistance.

Potential Combination Strategies:

1. Vancomycin or daptomycin + rifampin
2. Vancomycin or daptomycin + gentamicin (short-term use)
3. Beta-lactam + daptomycin (for synergistic effect)

Is combination therapy superior to monotherapy for MRSA bacteremia? The evidence for combination therapy in MRSA bacteremia is mixed. While some studies have shown potential benefits, particularly in specific clinical scenarios (e.g., prosthetic valve endocarditis), large-scale randomized controlled trials are still needed to definitively establish the role of combination therapy.

Healthcare providers should carefully weigh the potential benefits of combination therapy against the increased risk of adverse effects and the promotion of antimicrobial resistance.

Optimizing MRSA Treatment: Personalized Approaches

As our understanding of MRSA infections and antimicrobial pharmacology grows, there is an increasing focus on personalized treatment approaches to optimize patient outcomes.

Key Factors in Personalizing MRSA Treatment:

• Site and severity of infection
• Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns
• Patient-specific factors (e.g., renal function, drug allergies)
• Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic considerations
• Local epidemiology and resistance patterns

How can healthcare providers tailor MRSA treatment to individual patients? Implementing a personalized approach involves several strategies:

1. Rapid diagnostic testing to confirm MRSA and determine antimicrobial susceptibilities
2. Use of therapeutic drug monitoring for agents like vancomycin to ensure optimal dosing
3. Consideration of alternative agents (e.g., daptomycin) for isolates with elevated vancomycin MICs
4. Integration of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling to optimize dosing regimens
5. Regular reassessment of treatment efficacy and adjustment of therapy as needed

By tailoring treatment to each patient’s unique circumstances, healthcare providers can maximize the chances of successful outcomes while minimizing the risk of treatment failure and the development of further resistance.

Future Directions in MRSA Treatment

The landscape of MRSA treatment continues to evolve, with ongoing research into new antimicrobial agents and innovative therapeutic approaches. Several areas of investigation hold promise for improving MRSA management in the future:

Novel Antimicrobial Agents

Researchers are exploring new classes of antibiotics and novel mechanisms of action to combat MRSA. Some promising candidates in various stages of development include:

• Delafloxacin: A novel fluoroquinolone with activity against MRSA
• Iclaprim: A diaminopyrimidine antibiotic targeting bacterial dihydrofolate reductase
• Lefamulin: A pleuromutilin antibiotic inhibiting bacterial protein synthesis

Immunomodulatory Therapies

Enhancing the host immune response to MRSA infections is an area of active research. Approaches under investigation include:

• Monoclonal antibodies targeting S. aureus virulence factors
• Vaccines to prevent MRSA infections
• Immunomodulators to augment the innate immune response

Antimicrobial Peptides

Naturally occurring and synthetic antimicrobial peptides are being explored as potential alternatives or adjuncts to traditional antibiotics. These peptides often have broad-spectrum activity and may be less prone to resistance development.

Bacteriophage Therapy

The use of bacteriophages (viruses that infect bacteria) to treat MRSA infections is gaining renewed interest. Phage therapy offers a highly specific approach to targeting bacterial pathogens and may be particularly useful for multidrug-resistant infections.

What challenges must be overcome to bring these novel therapies to clinical practice? While these approaches show promise, several hurdles remain:

• Demonstrating safety and efficacy in large-scale clinical trials
• Overcoming regulatory challenges for novel therapeutic modalities
• Addressing manufacturing and scalability issues
• Developing appropriate dosing strategies and administration protocols
• Integrating new therapies into existing treatment algorithms

As research in these areas progresses, healthcare providers can look forward to an expanding arsenal of tools for combating MRSA infections, potentially leading to improved patient outcomes and reduced antimicrobial resistance.

The Role of Antimicrobial Stewardship in MRSA Management

Effective management of MRSA infections extends beyond individual patient treatment to encompass broader antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Antimicrobial stewardship programs play a crucial role in optimizing MRSA treatment while minimizing the development and spread of resistance.

Key Components of Antimicrobial Stewardship for MRSA:

1. Evidence-based treatment guidelines
2. Proper antibiotic selection and de-escalation
3. Optimal dosing and duration of therapy
4. Monitoring of local resistance patterns
5. Education for healthcare providers and patients

How can healthcare institutions implement effective antimicrobial stewardship programs for MRSA? Successful implementation involves a multidisciplinary approach:

• Establishing a dedicated antimicrobial stewardship team
• Developing and regularly updating institutional treatment guidelines
• Implementing rapid diagnostic testing to guide appropriate therapy
• Utilizing clinical decision support systems
• Conducting regular audits and providing feedback to prescribers
• Collaborating with infection prevention and control teams

By integrating antimicrobial stewardship principles into MRSA management, healthcare institutions can improve patient outcomes, reduce unnecessary antibiotic use, and slow the development of resistance.

Preventing MRSA Infections: A Crucial Complement to Treatment

While effective treatment strategies are essential, preventing MRSA infections in the first place remains a critical goal. Healthcare institutions and communities must implement comprehensive prevention programs to reduce the burden of MRSA infections.

Key Prevention Strategies:

• Hand hygiene compliance
• Contact precautions for known MRSA carriers
• Environmental cleaning and disinfection
• Active surveillance cultures in high-risk settings
• Decolonization protocols for MRSA carriers
• Proper wound care and management

How can healthcare providers balance infection prevention measures with patient care needs? Implementing MRSA prevention strategies requires careful consideration of patient needs and potential unintended consequences. For example, while contact precautions are important for preventing MRSA transmission, they may also lead to reduced patient contact and potential negative psychological effects.

Healthcare providers should strive to implement evidence-based prevention measures while maintaining a patient-centered approach to care. This may involve:

• Educating patients and families about the importance of infection prevention measures
• Implementing “universal” approaches (e.g., universal gloving) where appropriate
• Regularly assessing the impact of prevention measures on patient care and outcomes
• Adapting strategies based on local epidemiology and risk factors

By combining effective treatment strategies with robust prevention efforts, healthcare providers and institutions can work towards reducing the overall burden of MRSA infections and improving patient outcomes.

Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

1. Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, Daum RS, Fridkin SK, Gorwitz RJ, Kaplan SL, Karchmer AW, Levine DP, Murray BE. J Rybak M, Talan DA, Chambers HF; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:e18–55. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

2. Kalil AC, Van Schooneveld TC, Fey PD, Rupp ME. Association between vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration and mortality among patients with Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2014;312:1552–1564. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Neely MN, Youn G, Jones B, Jelliffe RW, Drusano GL, Rodvold KA, Lodise TP. Are vancomycin trough concentrations adequate for optimal dosing? Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:309–316. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Zelenitsky S, Rubinstein E, Ariano R, Iacovides H, Dodek P, Mirzanejad Y, Kumar A, Cooperative Antimicrobial Therapy of Septic Shock-CATSS Database Research Group Vancomycin pharmacodynamics and survival in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus-associated septic shock. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2013;41:255–260. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Cavalcanti AB, Goncalves AR, Almeida CS, Bugano DD, Silva E. Teicoplanin versus vancomycin for proven or suspected infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010:CD007022. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

6. Yoon YK, Park DW, Sohn JW, Kim HY, Kim YS, Lee CS, Lee MS, Ryu SY, Jang HC, Choi YJ, Kang CI, Choi HJ, Lee SS, Kim SW, Kim SI, Kim ES, Kim JY, Yang KS, Peck KR, Kim MJ. Multicenter prospective observational study of the comparative efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin in patients with health care-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:317–324. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Karlowsky JA, Nichol K, Zhanel GG. Telavancin: mechanisms of action, in vitro activity, and mechanisms of resistance. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;61(Suppl 2):S58–68. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Stryjewski ME, Lentnek A, O’Riordan W, Pullman J, Tambyah PA, Miró JM, Fowler VG, Jr, Barriere SL, Kitt MM, Corey GR. A randomized Phase 2 trial of telavancin versus standard therapy in patients with uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: the ASSURE study. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:289. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. National Institutes of Health. A phase 3 telavancin Staphylococcus aureus (S. Aureus) bacteremia trial. [Accessed June 30 2015]. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/{“type”:”clinical-trial”,”attrs”:{“text”:”NCT02208063″,”term_id”:”NCT02208063″}}NCT02208063.

10. Fowler VG, Jr, Boucher HW, Corey GR, Abrutyn E, Karchmer AW, Rupp ME, Levine DP, Chambers HF, Tally FP, Vigliani GA, Cabell CH, Link AS, DeMeyer I, Filler SG, Zervos M, Cook P, Parsonnet J, Bernstein JM, Price CS, Forrest GN, Fätkenheuer G, Gareca M, Rehm SJ, Brodt HR, Tice A, Cosgrove SE. S. aureus Endocarditis and Bacteremia Study Group. Daptomycin versus standard therapy for bacteremia and endocarditis caused by Staphylococcus aureus
. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:653–665. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Carpenter CF, Chambers HF. Daptomycin: another novel agent for treating infections due to drug-resistant gram-positive pathogens. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:994–1000. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Moore CL, Osaki-Kiyan P, Haque NZ, Perri MB, Donabedian S, Zervos MJ. Daptomycin versus vancomycin for bloodstream infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with a high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration: a case-control study. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54:51–58. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Murray KP, Zhao JJ, Davis SL, Kullar R, Kaye KS, Lephart P, Rybak MJ. Early use of daptomycin versus vancomycin for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia with vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration >1 mg/L: a matched cohort study. Clin Infect Dis. 2013;56:1562–1569. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Saravolatz LD, Stein GE, Johnson LB. Ceftaroline: a novel cephalosporin with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus
. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:1156–1163. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Otero LH, Rojas-Altuve A, Llarrull LI, Carrasco-López C, Kumarasiri M, Lastochkin E, Fishovitz J, Dawley M, Hesek D, Lee M, Johnson JW, Fisher JF, Chang M, Mobashery S, Hermoso JA. How allosteric control of Staphylococcus aureus penicillin binding protein 2a enables methicillin resistance and physiological function. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:16808–16813. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Espedido BA, Jensen SO, van Hal SJ. Ceftaroline fosamil salvage therapy: an option for reduced-vancomycin-susceptible MRSA bacteraemia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:797–801. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Vazquez JA, Maggiore CR, Cole P, Smith A, Jandourek A, Friedland HD. Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia secondary to acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections or community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Infect Dis Clin Pract. 2015;23:39–43. [Baltim Md] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Casapao AM, Davis SL, Barr VO, Klinker KP, Goff DA, Barber KE, Kaye KS, Mynatt RP, Molloy LM, Pogue JM, Rybak MJ. Large retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:2541–2546. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Moellering RC. Linezolid: the first oxazolidinone antimicrobial. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:135–142. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Stevens DL, Wallace RJ, Hamilton SM, Bryant AE. Successful treatment of staphylococcal toxic shock syndrome with linezolid: a case report and in vitro evaluation of the production of toxic shock syndrome toxin type 1 in the presence of antibiotics. Clin Infect Dis. 2006;42:729–730. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Jang HC, Kim SH, Kim KH, Kim CJ, Lee S, Song KH, Jeon JH, Park WB, Kim HB, Park SW, Kim NJ, Kim EC, Oh MD, Choe KW. Salvage treatment for persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: efficacy of linezolid with or without carbapenem. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;49:395–401. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

22. Wilcox MH, Tack KJ, Bouza E, Herr DL, Ruf BR, Ijzerman MM, Croos-Dabrera RV, Kunkel MJ, Knirsch C. Complicated skin and skin-structure infections and catheter-related bloodstream infections: noninferiority of linezolid in a phase 3 study. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48:203–212. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Park HJ, Kim SH, Kim MJ, Lee YM, Park SY, Moon SM, Park KH, Chong YP, Lee SO, Choi SH, Woo JH, Kim YS. Efficacy of linezolid-based salvage therapy compared with glycopeptide-based therapy in patients with persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. J Infect. 2012;65:505–512. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Sánchez García M, De la Torre MA, Morales G, Peláez B, Tolón MJ, Domingo S, Candel FJ, Andrade R, Arribi A, García N, Martínez Sagasti F, Fereres J, Picazo J. Clinical outbreak of linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an intensive care unit. JAMA. 2010;303:2260–2264. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

25. Rybak JM, Marx K, Martin CA. Early experience with tedizolid: clinical efficacy, pharmacodynamics, and resistance. Pharmacotherapy. 2014;34:1198–1208. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Chan LC, Basuino L, Dip EC, Chambers HF. Comparative efficacies of tedizolid phosphate, vancomycin, and daptomycin in a rabbit model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:3252–3256. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Stein GE, Babinchak T. Tigecycline: an update. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2013;75:331–336. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

28. Gardiner D, Dukart G, Cooper A, Babinchak T. Safety and efficacy of intravenous tigecycline in subjects with secondary bacteremia: pooled results from 8 phase III clinical trials. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50:229–238. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

29. Ramirez J, Dartois N, Gandjini H, Yan JL, Korth-Bradley J, McGovern PC. Randomized phase 2 trial to evaluate the clinical efficacy of two high-dosage tigecycline regimens versus imipenem-cilastatin for treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57:1756–1762. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

30. Dilworth TJ, Ibrahim O, Hall P, Sliwinski J, Walraven C, Mercier RC. beta-Lactams enhance vancomycin activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia compared to vancomycin alone. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:102–109. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

31. Davis JS, Sud A, O’Sullivan MV, Robinson JO, Ferguson PE, Foo H, van Hal SJ, Ralph AP, Howden BP, Binks PM, Kirby A, Tong SY.
Combination Antibiotics for MEthicillin Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CAMERA) study group; Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases Clinical Research Network. Combination of vancomycin and beta-lactam therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a pilot multicenter randomized controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;62:173–180. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

32. Chambers HF, Basuino L, Hamilton SM, Choo EJ, Moise P. Daptomycin- β-lactam combinations in a rabbit model of daptomycin-nonsusceptible methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:3976–3979. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

33. Sakoulas G, Moise PA, Casapao AM, Nonejuie P, Olson J, Okumura CY, Rybak MJ, Kullar R, Dhand A, Rose WE, Goff DA, Bressler AM, Lee Y, Pogliano J, Johns S, Kaatz GW, Ebright JR, Nizet V. Antimicrobial salvage therapy for persistent staphylococcal bacteremia using daptomycin plus ceftaroline. Clin Ther. 2014;36:1317–1333. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA)

• “Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus” is also available in Portable Document Format (PDF, 47KB, 2pg. )
• Versión en español
• Community-Associated Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA)
• Antibiotic Resistance

What is MRSA?

MRSA refers to a type of bacteria (Staphylococcus aureus) that is resistant to many antibiotics. It is a common cause of hospital-acquired infections.

Who gets MRSA?

Anyone can get MRSA, but it is found most often in hospitalized patients.

What are the symptoms associated with MRSA infection?

MRSA infections can cause a broad range of symptoms depending on the part of the body that is infected. These may include surgical wounds, burns, catheter sites, eye, skin and blood. Infection often results in redness, swelling and tenderness at the site of infection. Sometimes, people may carry MRSA without having any symptoms.

How is it transmitted?

The staph bacteria is generally spread through direct contact with the hands of a health care worker or patient who is infected or carrying the organism.

How long can an infected person carry MRSA?

Some people can carry MRSA for days to many months, even after their infection has been treated.

How are MRSA infections diagnosed?

MRSA infections can be diagnosed when a doctor obtains a sample or specimen from the site of infection and submits it to a laboratory. The laboratory places the specimen on a special “culture” plate containing nutrients, incubates the plate in a warmer and then identifies the bacteria. The final step is for the laboratory to conduct tests using various antibiotics to determine if the bacteria are resistant (able to withstand or tolerate) or sensitive (susceptible to killing) to select antibiotics.

What is the treatment for MRSA?

Although MRSA cannot be effectively treated with antibiotics such as methicillin, nafcillin, cephalosporin or penicillin, it can usually be treated with an antibiotic called vancomycin. Recently, however, a few strains of Staphylococcus aureus have even developed some degree of resistance to vancomycin.