Staphylococcal Infections

Back

Practice Essentials

Staphylococcal infections usually are caused by Staphylococcus aureus (S aureus). However, the incidence of infections due to Staphylococcus epidermidis (S epidermidis) and other coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) also has been steadily rising.[1]

The image below depicts embolic lesions in patient with S aureus endocarditis.



View Image

Embolic lesions in patient with Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis.

Signs and symptoms

Manifestations of staphylococcal infections usually depend on the type of infection the organism causes. Common types of infections include the following[2] :

See Clinical Presentation for more detail.

Diagnosis

Examination in patients with staphylococcal infections may include the following findings:

Laboratory testing

Imaging studies

See Workup for more detail.

Management

Promptly start antimicrobial therapy when S aureus infection is documented or strongly suspected. Appropriate choices depend on local susceptibility patterns.[3]

Temporary intravascular devices should be promptly removed if infection is suspected.[4] Long-term intravascular devices should be removed if infection with S aureus is documented.

Multiple decolonization regimens have been used in patients with recurrent staphylococcal infection. In one study, treatment with topical mupirocin, chlorhexidine gluconate washes, and oral rifampin plus doxycycline for 7 days eradicated MRSA colonization in hospitalized patients.[5]

Pharmacotherapy

Patients with serious staphylococcal infections should be initially started on agents active against MRSA until susceptibility results are available. Many CoNS are oxacillin-resistant. The duration of treatment and the use of synergistic combinations depend on the type of infection encountered. Pharmacist intervention through vancomycin dosing improved survival rates in a retrospective study of patients with MRSA bacteremia.[6]

The following antibiotics may be used in the management of staphylococcal infections (listed alphabetically, not necessarily in order of preference):

Surgery

Abscesses must be drained and/or debrided. Infections involving a prosthetic joint usually require removal of the prosthesis. Other infections involving a prosthetic device (eg, prosthetic heart valve or implanted intravascular device) may or may not require removal of the device.

See Treatment and Medication for more detail.

Background

Staphylococcal infections are usually caused by the organism S aureus. However, the incidence of infections due to S epidermidis and other CoNS has been steadily increasing in recent years. This article focuses on S aureus but also discusses infections caused by CoNS when important differences exist.

Pathophysiology

S aureus is a gram-positive coccus that is both catalase- and coagulase-positive. Colonies are golden and strongly hemolytic on blood agar. They produce a range of toxins, including alpha-toxin, beta-toxin, gamma-toxin, delta-toxin, exfoliatin, enterotoxins, Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL),[7] and toxic shock syndrome toxin–1 (TSST-1).[8] The enterotoxins and TSST-1 are associated with toxic shock syndrome. PVL is associated with necrotic skin[9] and lung infections and has been shown to be a major virulence factor for pneumonia[10] and osteomyelitis.[11]  CoNS, particularly S epidermidis, produce an exopolysaccharide (slime) that promotes foreign-body adherence and resistance to phagocytosis.

Nienaber et al have demonstrated that methicillin-susceptible S aureus (MSSA) isolates causing endocarditis are more likely to be from a specific clonal cluster (CC30) and to possess specific virulence genes as compared to MSSA isolates from the same regions causing soft tissue infection. Isolates from patients with endocarditis were more likely to possess genes for 3 different adhesins and 5 different enterotoxins. The gene for PVL was found in the minority of both groups.[12]

S aureus has evolved to develop numerous immune evasion strategies to combat neutrophil-mediated killing, such as neutrophil activation, migration to the site of infection, bacterial opsonization, phagocytosis, and subsequent neutrophil-mediated killing. As many as 40 immune-evasion molecules of S aureus are known, and new functions are being identified for these evasion proteins.[13]

In a study of 42 S lugdunensis isolates, most isolates were able to form at least a weak biofilm, but the amount of biofilm formed by isolates was heterogeneous with poor correlation between clinical severity of disease and degree of biofilm formation.[14]

Frequency

United States

Up to 80% of people are eventually colonized with S aureus. Most are colonized only intermittently; 20-30% are persistently colonized. Colonization rates in health care workers, persons with diabetes, and patients on dialysis are higher than in the general population. The anterior nares are the predominant site of colonization in adults; carriage here has been associated with the development of bacteremia.[15] Other potential sites of colonization include the throat,[16] axilla, rectum, and perineum. The rate of MRSA hand colonization among health care workers has been shown to exceed 4% (over 8% in North America).[17]

International

S aureus infection occurs worldwide. Pyomyositis due to S aureus is more prevalent in the tropics.

Mortality/Morbidity

Mortality due to staphylococcal infections varies widely. Untreated S aureus bacteremia carries a mortality rate that exceeds 80%. The mortality rate of staphylococcal toxic shock syndrome is 3-5%. Infections due to CoNS usually carry a very low mortality rate. Because these infections are commonly associated with prosthetic devices, the most serious complication is the need to remove the involved prosthesis, although prosthetic valve endocarditis may lead to death.

Risk factors associated with increased mortality among patients with S aureus bacteremia include thrombocytopenia, an elevated score on the Charlson Comorbidity Index, MRSA infection, admission to an intensive care unit, and prior exposure to antibiotics.[18, 19]

Race

Staphylococcal infections have no reported racial predilection.

Sex

The vaginal carriage rate of staphylococcal species is approximately 10% in premenopausal women. The rate is even higher during menses.

Age

Staphylococcal species colonize many neonates on the skin, perineum, umbilical stump, and GI tract. The staphylococcal colonization rate in adults is approximately 40% at any given time.

The mortality rate of S aureus bacteremia in elderly persons is markedly increased.[20]

History

Common manifestations of staphylococcal infections include the following types of infections. The history obtained usually depends on the type of infection the organism causes.

Physical

Physical findings include the following:

Causes

Predisposing factors for staphylococcal infections include the following:

Colonization with S aureus is common. Skin-to-skin and skin-to-fomite contact are common routes of acquisition.[24, 25] Isolates can be spread by coughing or sneezing.[26] Evidence has also shown that S aureus can be spread between men during sex with other men.[27] Pets can also serve as household reservoirs.[28] The rate of MRSA hand colonization among health care workers has been shown to exceed 4% (over 8% in North America).[17]

Laboratory Studies

Obtain cultures (with susceptibilities) as appropriate for the site of infection. Blood cultures may be positive for staphylococcal species, even when results from other cultures are negative. Obtain blood cultures from all patients with serious infections.

Deck et al have demonstrated a high sensitivity for S aureus (99.5%) and CoNS from positive blood cultures using a PNA FISH method. Turnaround times were less than 30 minutes.[29]

Patients with S aureus bacteremia should undergo repeat cultures after starting appropriate therapy. Patients with persistent bacteremia (after ≥3 days of appropriate therapy) are more likely to have underlying endocarditis.

CBC count usually reveals leukocytosis with a left shift (bands). Patients with chronic staphylococcal infection may have thrombocytosis.

Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein may be helpful in patients with subacute or chronic infections such as osteomyelitis.

Teichoic acid antibody titers in patients with continuous S aureus bacteremias suggest a deep-seated (not intravenous line) focus (eg, endocarditis, abscess, osteomyelitis).

Screening tests for nasal colonization with methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) are not predictive of the subsequent development of MRSA pneumonia (sensitivity, 23%) or MRSA bloodstream infection (sensitivity, 24%).[30]

Other Tests

Patients with S aureus or S lugdunensis bacteremia should undergo echocardiography.[31] Some experts recommend transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in all patients without contraindications to rule out S aureus endocarditis.[32] Several scoring systems have been developed to be more selective in this determination.[33] High-risk factors for endocarditis include persistence of positive blood cultures for 5 days or longer while on appropriate antibiotic therapy, presence of a long-term indwelling intravenous catheter or device, and presence of a prosthetic heart valve.

Medical Care

Promptly start antimicrobial therapy when S aureus infection is documented or strongly suspected. Appropriate choices depend on local susceptibility patterns.[3] Initiation of subinhibitory concentrations of antibiotics may lead to increased production of PVL.[34] The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) has published detailed guidelines on the treatment of methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) infections.[35]

Patients are defined as having uncomplicated MRSA bacteremia if endocarditis has been excluded; there are no implanted prostheses; follow-up blood cultures performed on specimens obtained 2 to 4 days after the initial positive set do not grow MRSA; defervescence occurs within 72 hours of initiating effective therapy; and there is no evidence of metastatic sites of infection. Such patients can be treated for 14 days with a low relapse/failure rate.[35, 36]

Temporary intravascular devices should be promptly removed if infection is suspected.[4] Long-term intravascular devices should be removed if infection with S aureus is documented.

Multiple decolonization regimens have been used in patients with recurrent staphylococcal infection. Treatment with topical mupirocin, chlorhexidine gluconate washes, and oral rifampin plus doxycycline for 7 days eradicated MRSA colonization in hospitalized patients.[5] Household members should avoid sharing personal hygiene items; decolonization of all household members should be recommended to patients with recurrent skin and soft tissue infections or to patients with multiple household members who experience skin and soft tissue infections.[37]

Surgical Care

Abscesses must be drained. Infections involving a prosthetic joint usually require removal of the prosthesis. Other infections involving a prosthetic device, such as a prosthetic heart valve or implanted intravascular device, may or may not require removal of the device.

Consultations

Consultation with an infectious disease specialist should be obtained for all patients with S aureus bacteremia. Doing so results in improved adherence to IDSA guidelines, decreased in-hospital mortality, and earlier discharge.[38] Pharmacist intervention through vancomycin dosing has been shown to improve survival rates in a retrospective study of patients with MRSA bacteremia.[6]

Medication Summary

Historically, isolates resistant to oxacillin (commonly referred to as MRSA) were resistant to most agents other than vancomycin, but these isolates were limited to nosocomial infections. In the 1990s, many reports appeared describing community-acquired MRSA infections that were susceptible to various non–beta-lactam antibiotics. As such, patients with serious staphylococcal infections should be initially started on agents active against MRSA until susceptibility results are available.[39, 40, 41] Many CoNS are oxacillin-resistant. The duration of treatment depends on the type of infection encountered. Treatment of methicillin-susceptible S aureus (MSSA) bacteremia with cefazolin has been shown to improve survival rates and decrease toxicity in comparison to antistaphylococcal penicillins.[42, 43] S aureus endocarditis may require a prolonged course of antibiotics, although recent studies suggest it may be possible to switch many patients with endocarditis or complicated bacteremia to oral therapy after an initial course of 10 to 14 days of IV antimicrobial therapy.[44, 45, 46, 47]  

Although many strains of MRSA that cause community-acquired infection are susceptible to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, treatment with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole has been associated with clinical failure, especially in the presence of significant tissue damage.[48] Clindamycin decreased the repeat infection rate in one study of patients receiving incision and drainage for small skin abscesses compared with placebo trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole.[49]

Vancomycin-resistant isolates have been reported; isolates with an increased minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) to vancomycin are becoming more common and include both MRSA and MSSA.[50] Consensus guidelines no longer recommend dosing vancomycin based on trough levels of 15-20 mcg/mL,[51]  but instead recommend dosing vancomycin based on the area under the curve over 24 hours to minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC/MIC) with a target of 400-600 mg*hour/L.[52] .The results of such testing are often delayed .Because of these drawbacks and the availability of less nephrotoxic and more effective alternatives , vancomycin has a very limited role in treating staphylococcal infections.[53, 46]

In a study of 296 consecutive MRSA bacteremia episodes, several factors were predictive of high vancomycin MIC, including age older than 50 years, prior vancomycin exposure, history of MRSA bacteremia, history of chronic liver disease, and presence of a nontunneled catheter.[54]  

In a small study (40 subjects) with MRSA bacteremia, the combination of ceftaroline plus daptomycin was found to have lower in-hospital mortality rate as compared to vancomycin or daptomycin monotherapy.[55] The addition of daptomycin to cefazolin or cloxacillin did not result in improved outcomes in patients with MSSA bacteremia.[56]

Cefazolin

Clinical Context:  First-generation semisynthetic cephalosporin that arrests bacterial cell wall synthesis, inhibiting bacterial growth. Primarily active against skin flora, including S aureus (MSSA). Typically used alone for skin and skin-structure coverage. IV and IM dosing regimens are similar.

Ceftaroline (Teflaro)

Clinical Context:  Fifth-generation cephalosporin antimicrobial with activity against aerobic gram-negative bacteria, anaerobic gram-positive bacteria, and aerobic gram-positive bacteria, including MRSA.

Cefuroxime (Ceftin, Zinacef)

Clinical Context:  Second-generation cephalosporin with activity against respiratory aerobic gram-negative organisms, including Haemophilus influenza, and aerobic gram-positive aerobic organisms, including Streptococcus pyogenes and MSSA.

Ceftobiprole medocaril sodium (Zevtera)

Clinical Context:  Extended-spectrum cephalosporin with activity against clinically important gram-positive bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). It is indicated for S aureus bacteremia (SAB) in adults, including right-sided infective endocarditis, caused by methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant isolates. It is also indicated for adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Additionally, it is indicated for community- acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) in adults and children aged 3 months and older. 

Dicloxacillin (Dycill, Dynapen)

Clinical Context:  Binds to one or more penicillin-binding proteins, which, in turn, inhibits synthesis of bacterial cell walls. For treatment of infections caused by penicillinase-producing staphylococci susceptible to methicillin (MSSA). Also active against most nonenterococcal streptococci. May use to initiate therapy when staphylococcal infection is suggested.

Nafcillin (Nallpen in Dextrose)

Clinical Context:  Preferred therapy for methicillin-susceptible S aureus (MSSA) staphylococci infections. Use parenteral therapy initially in severe infections. Oxacillin may be substituted for nafcillin based on hospital formulary. Change to oral therapy as condition warrants.

Dalbavancin (Dalvance)

Clinical Context:  Dalbavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic that prevents cross-linking by interfering with cell wall synthesis. It is bactericidal in vitro against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes at concentrations observed in humans at recommended doses. It is indicated for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections caused by gram-positive bacteria including S aureus (including MSSA and MRSA ), S pyogenes, Streptococcus agalactiae, and the Streptococcus anginosus group (including S anginosus, S intermedius, S constellatus).

Oritavancin (Orbactiv)

Clinical Context:  Oritavancin is lipoglycopeptide antibiotic that inhibits cell wall biosynthesis and disrupts bacterial membrane integrity that leads to cell death. It is indicated for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections caused by gram-positive bacteria including S aureus (including methicillin-susceptible S aureus and MRSA), S pyogenes, S agalactiae, S dysgalactiae, S anginosus group (S anginosus, S intermedius, S constellatus) and E faecalis (vancomycin-susceptible isolates only).

Telavancin (Vibativ)

Clinical Context:  Lipoglycopeptide antibiotic that is a synthetic derivative of vancomycin. Inhibits bacterial cell wall synthesis by interfering with polymerization and cross-linking of peptidoglycan. Unlike vancomycin, telavancin also depolarizes the bacterial cell membrane and disrupts its functional integrity. Indicated for complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by susceptible gram-positive bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus (both methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible strains), Streptococcus pyogenes, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus anginosus group, and Enterococcus faecalis (vancomycin-susceptible isolates only).

Linezolid (Zyvox)

Clinical Context:  Prevents formation of functional 70S initiation complex, which is essential for bacterial translation process. Bacteriostatic against staphylococci (MSSA/MRSA).

The FDA warns against the concurrent use of linezolid with serotonergic psychiatric drugs, unless indicated for life-threatening or urgent conditions. Linezolid may increase serotonin CNS levels as a result of MAO-A inhibition, increasing the risk of serotonin syndrome.

Vancomycin

Clinical Context:  Its role is quite limited because of difficulty I achieving adequate levels and the availability safer and more effective antibiotics

Tedizolid (Sivextro)

Clinical Context:  Tedizolid is an oxazolidinone antibiotic indicated for skin and skin structure infections caused by susceptible isolates of Gram-positive bacteria including Staphylococcus aureus (including methicillin-resistant [MRSA] and methicillin-susceptible [MSSA] isolates), Streptococcus pyogenes, S agalactiae, S anginosus Group (including S anginosus, S intermedius, and S constellatus), and Enterococcus faecalis. Its action is mediated by binding to the 50S subunit of the bacterial ribosome resulting in inhibition of protein synthesis.

Doxycycline (Acticlate, Adoxa, Vibramycin, Doryx)

Clinical Context:  Inhibits protein synthesis and thus bacterial growth by binding to 30S and possibly 50S ribosomal subunits of susceptible bacteria. Active against MSSA/MRSA. Less active against coagulase-negative staphylococci.

Minocycline (Minocin, Solodyn)

Clinical Context:  Inhibits protein synthesis and thus bacterial growth by binding to 30S and possibly 50S ribosomal subunits of susceptible bacteria. Active against MSSA/MRSA. Less active against coagulase-negative staphylococci. Doxycycline (Vibramycin) is used more commonly than minocycline.

Clindamycin (Cleocin)

Clinical Context:  Lincosamide for treatment of serious skin and soft tissue staphylococci infections. Also effective against aerobic and anaerobic streptococci (except enterococcal). Inhibits bacterial growth, possibly by blocking dissociation of peptidyl t-RNA from ribosomes, causing RNA-dependent protein synthesis to arrest.

Daptomycin (Cubicin)

Clinical Context:  Indicated to treat complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by S aureus (including MRSA strains), Streptococcus pyogenes, Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus dysgalactiae, and Enterococcus faecalis. Also indicated for right-sided endocarditis due to S aureus. First of new antibiotic class called cyclic lipopeptides. Binds to bacterial membranes and causes rapid membrane potential depolarization, thereby inhibiting protein, DNA, and RNA synthesis and ultimately causing cell death.

Quinupristin/dalfopristin (Synercid)

Clinical Context:  Belongs to the streptogramin group of antibiotics. Mechanism of action is similar to macrolides/lincosamides. Inhibits protein synthesis and is usually bacteriostatic. Also an option for methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) infections.

Tigecycline (Tygacil)

Clinical Context:  A glycylcycline antibiotic that is structurally similar to tetracycline antibiotics. Inhibits bacterial protein translation by binding to 30S ribosomal subunit, and blocks entry of amino-acyl tRNA molecules in ribosome A site. Indicated for complicated skin and skin structure infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections. Active against S aureus (including MRSA), as well as most streptococci, enterococci (including VRE), and gram-negative organisms (including anaerobes).

Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (Bactrim, Bactrim DS, Sulfatrim Pediatric)

Clinical Context:  Inhibits bacterial growth by inhibiting synthesis of dihydrofolic acid. Active against most staphylococci (MSSA), including some strains resistant to methicillin (MRSA).

Delafloxacin (Baxdela)

Clinical Context:  New oral and intravenous fluoroquinolone with activity against MRSA. The best of this class for MRSA, although not a preferred agent, as it is new and quite expensive.

Class Summary

Empiric antimicrobial therapy should be comprehensive and cover all likely pathogens in the context of the clinical setting.

Further Inpatient Care

Many hospitals have implemented screening for methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) infections upon admission to an intensive care unit. Topical decolonization therapy and contact isolation of patients who test positive for MRSA has been shown to decrease MRSA infection rates.[24]

A nationwide Veterans Administration hospital program of nasal surveillance, contact precautions, and hand hygiene reduced ICU healthcare-associated MRSA infections by 62% and non-ICU healthcare-associated MRSA infections by 45%.[57]

Nonantibiotic methods to reduce nasal S aureus colonization are emerging. A study by Steed et al showed nasal application of a nonantibiotic alcohol-based antiseptic (Nozin Nasal Sanitizer advanced antiseptic from Global Life Technologies, Corp) was effective in reducing S aureus and total bacterial carriage, suggesting the usefulness of this approach as a safe, effective, and convenient alternative to antibiotic treatment. Seventy-eight of 387 healthcare providers screened (20.2%) tested positive for S aureus infection. Of 39 subjects who tested positive for S aureus infection who completed the study, 20 received antiseptic and 19 received placebo treatment. Antiseptic treatment reduced S aureus colony-forming units from baseline by 99% (median) and 82% (mean) (P< 0.001). Total bacterial colony-forming units were reduced by 91% (median) and 71% (mean) (P< 0.001).[58]

Complications

Complications of S aureus bacteremia include septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, pyomyositis, endocarditis, and pneumonia.

Prognosis

The prognosis of staphylococcal infections varies widely depending on the site of infection and the underlying condition. Overall, the prognosis is good, with full recovery in most patients who receive appropriate therapy.

Patient Education

For excellent patient education resources, visit eMedicineHealth's Women's Health Center. Also, see eMedicineHealth's patient education article Toxic Shock Syndrome.

What causes staphylococcal infections?What are common types of staphylococcal infections?What are the physical findings of staphylococcal infection?Which lab tests are indicated in the workup of staphylococcal infections?Which imaging studies are indicated in the workup of staphylococcal infections?How is staphylococcal infection treated?Which antibiotics are indicated in the management of staphylococcal infections?When is surgery indicated in the treatment of staphylococcal infections?What are the causes of staphylococcal infections?What is the pathophysiology of staphylococcal infections?What is the prevalence of staphylococcal infections in the US?What is the global prevalence of staphylococcal infections?What is the mortality rate of staphylococcal infections?Do staphylococcal infections have a racial predilection?What are the sex-related demographics of staphylococcal infections?What are the age-related demographics of staphylococcal infections?What are common manifestations of staphylococcal infections?What are the physical findings of skin and soft-tissue infections in staphylococcal infection?What are the physical findings of toxic shock syndrome in staphylococcal infection?What are the physical findings of endocarditis in staphylococcal infection?What are the predisposing factors for staphylococcal infections?What are the differential diagnoses for Staphylococcal Infections?Which lab studies are indicated in the workup of staphylococcal infections?When is echocardiography indicated in the workup of staphylococcal infections?What medical care is indicated in the treatment of staphylococcal infections?What surgical care is indicated in the treatment of staphylococcal infections?Which specialist consultations are indicated in the treatment of staphylococcal infections?Which medications are used in the treatment of staphylococcal infections?Which medications in the drug class Antibiotics are used in the treatment of Staphylococcal Infections?How is transmission of staphylococcal infections prevented in hospitals?What are the complications of staphylococcal infections?What is the prognosis of staphylococcal infections?What educational resources are available on staphylococcal infection?

Author

Thomas E Herchline, MD, Professor of Medicine, Wright State University, Boonshoft School of Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editors

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Chief Editor

John L Brusch, MD, FACP, Corresponding Faculty Member, Harvard Medical School

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Klaus-Dieter Lessnau, MD, FCCP, Former Clinical Associate Professor of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine; Medical Director, Pulmonary Physiology Laboratory, Director of Research in Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Medicine, Section of Pulmonary Medicine, Lenox Hill Hospital

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References

  1. Sanchini A. Recent Developments in Phenotypic and Molecular Diagnostic Methods for Antimicrobial Resistance Detection in Staphylococcus aureus: A Narrative Review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2022 Jan 15. 12 (1):[View Abstract]
  2. Rongisch R, Fabri M. [Soft tissue infections]. Hautarzt. 2022 Mar. 73 (3):223-233. [View Abstract]
  3. Schramm GE, Johnson JA, Doherty JA, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus sterile-site infection: The importance of appropriate initial antimicrobial treatment. Crit Care Med. 2006 Aug. 34(8):2069-74. [View Abstract]
  4. [Guideline] Mermel LA, Farr BM, Sherertz RJ, et al. Guidelines for the management of intravascular catheter-related infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 May 1. 32(9):1249-72. [View Abstract]
  5. Simor AE, Phillips E, McGeer A, et al. Randomized controlled trial of chlorhexidine gluconate for washing, intranasal mupirocin, and rifampin and doxycycline versus no treatment for the eradication of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization. Clin Infect Dis. 2007 Jan 15. 44(2):178-85. [View Abstract]
  6. Komoto A, Maiguma T, Teshima D, Sugiyama T, Haruki Y. Effects of pharmacist intervention in Vancomycin treatment for patients with bacteremia due to Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. PLoS One. 2018. 13 (9):e0203453. [View Abstract]
  7. Baggett HC, Hennessy TW, Rudolph K, et al. Community-onset methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus associated with antibiotic use and the cytotoxin Panton-Valentine leukocidin during a furunculosis outbreak in rural Alaska. J Infect Dis. 2004 May 1. 189(9):1565-73. [View Abstract]
  8. Czachor J, Herchline T. Bacteremic nonmenstrual staphylococcal toxic shock syndrome associated with enterotoxins A and C. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Feb 1. 32(3):E53-6. [View Abstract]
  9. Yamasaki O, Kaneko J, Morizane S, et al. The Association between Staphylococcus aureus strains carrying panton-valentine leukocidin genes and the development of deep-seated follicular infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2005 Feb 1. 40(3):381-5. [View Abstract]
  10. Labandeira-Rey M, Couzon F, Boisset S, Brown EL, Bes M, Benito Y. Staphylococcus aureus Panton-Valentine leukocidin causes necrotizing pneumonia. Science. 2007 Feb 23. 315(5815):1130-3. [View Abstract]
  11. Cremieux AC, Dumitrescu O, Lina G, Vallee C, et al. Panton-valentine leukocidin enhances the severity of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus rabbit osteomyelitis. PLoS One. 2009 Sep 25. 4(9):e7204. [View Abstract]
  12. Nienaber JJ, Sharma Kuinkel BK, Clarke-Pearson M, Lamlertthon S, Park L, Rude TH, et al. Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Endocarditis Isolates Are Associated With Clonal Complex 30 Genotype and a Distinct Repertoire of Enterotoxins and Adhesins. J Infect Dis. 2011 Sep. 204(5):704-713. [View Abstract]
  13. de Jong NWM, van Kessel KPM, van Strijp JAG. Immune Evasion by Staphylococcus aureus. Microbiol Spectr. 2019 Mar. 7 (2):[View Abstract]
  14. Kleiner E, Monk AB, Archer GL, Forbes BA. Clinical significance of Staphylococcus lugdunensis isolated from routine cultures. Clin Infect Dis. 2010 Oct 1. 51(7):801-3. [View Abstract]
  15. von Eiff C, Becker K, Machka K, et al. Nasal carriage as a source of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Study Group. N Engl J Med. 2001 Jan 4. 344(1):11-6. [View Abstract]
  16. Mertz D, Frei R, Periat N, Zimmerli M, Battegay M, Flückiger U. Exclusive Staphylococcus aureus throat carriage: at-risk populations. Arch Intern Med. 2009 Jan 26. 169(2):172-8. [View Abstract]
  17. Montoya A, Schildhouse R, Goyal A, Mann JD, Snyder A, Chopra V, et al. How often are health care personnel hands colonized with multidrug- resistant organisms? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Infect Control. 2019 Jun. 47 (6):693-703. [View Abstract]
  18. Gafter-Gvili A, Mansur N, Bivas A, et al. Thrombocytopenia in Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Risk Factors and Prognostic Importance. Mayo Clin Proc. 2011 May. 86(5):389-96. [View Abstract]
  19. Yilmaz M, Elaldi N, Balkan İİ, Arslan F, Batırel AA, Bakıcı MZ, et al. Mortality predictors of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a prospective multicenter study. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2016 Feb 9. 15 (1):7. [View Abstract]
  20. McClelland RS, Fowler VG Jr, Sanders LL, et al. Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia among elderly vs younger adult patients: comparison of clinical features and mortality. Arch Intern Med. 1999 Jun 14. 159(11):1244-7. [View Abstract]
  21. Kravitz GR, Dries DJ, Peterson ML, et al. Purpura fulminans due to Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis. 2005 Apr 1. 40(7):941-7. [View Abstract]
  22. Bor DH, Woolhandler S, Nardin R, Brusch J, Himmelstein DU. Infective endocarditis in the U.S., 1998-2009: a nationwide study. PLoS One. 2013. 8 (3):e60033. [View Abstract]
  23. Tande AJ, Palraj BR, Osmon DR, Berbari EF, Baddour LM, Lohse CM, et al. Clinical Presentation, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Hematogenous Prosthetic Joint Infection in Patients with Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia. Am J Med. 2016 Feb. 129 (2):221.e11-20. [View Abstract]
  24. Robicsek A, Beaumont JL, Paule SM, et al. Universal surveillance for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in 3 affiliated hospitals. Ann Intern Med. 2008 Mar 18. 148(6):409-18. [View Abstract]
  25. Miller LG, Diep BA. Clinical practice: colonization, fomites, and virulence: rethinking the pathogenesis of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Mar 1. 46(5):752-60. [View Abstract]
  26. Bischoff WE, Wallis ML, Tucker BK, et al. "Gesundheit!" sneezing, common colds, allergies, and Staphylococcus aureus dispersion. J Infect Dis. 2006 Oct 15. 194(8):1119-26. [View Abstract]
  27. Diep BA, Chambers HF, Graber CJ, et al. Emergence of multidrug-resistant, community-associated, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus clone USA300 in men who have sex with men. Ann Intern Med. 2008 Feb 19. 148(4):249-57. [View Abstract]
  28. Sing A, Tuschak C, Hörmansdorfer S. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a family and its pet cat. N Engl J Med. 2008 Mar 13. 358(11):1200-1. [View Abstract]
  29. Deck MK, Anderson ES, Buckner RJ, Colasante G, Coull JM, Crystal B, et al. Multicenter Evaluation of the Staphylococcus QuickFISH Method for Simultaneous Identification of Staphylococcus aureus and Coagulase Negative Staphylococci Directly from Blood Culture Bottles in less than Thirty Minutes. J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Apr 4. [View Abstract]
  30. Sarikonda KV, Micek ST, Doherty JA, et al. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization is a poor predictor of intensive care unit-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections requiring antibiotic treatment. Crit Care Med. 2010 Oct. 38(10):1991-5. [View Abstract]
  31. Holland TL, Arnold C, Fowler VG Jr. Clinical management of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a review. JAMA. 2014 Oct 1. 312 (13):1330-41. [View Abstract]
  32. Kaasch AJ, Fowler VG Jr, Rieg S, Peyerl-Hoffmann G, Birkholz H, Hellmich M, et al. Use of a simple criteria set for guiding echocardiography in nosocomial Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Jul 1. 53 (1):1-9. [View Abstract]
  33. Tubiana S, Duval X, Alla F, Selton-Suty C, Tattevin P, Delahaye F, et al. The VIRSTA score, a prediction score to estimate risk of infective endocarditis and determine priority for echocardiography in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. J Infect. 2016 Feb 22. [View Abstract]
  34. Dumitrescu O, Boisset S, Badiou C, Bes M, Benito Y, Reverdy ME, et al. Effect of antibiotics on Staphylococcus aureus producing Panton-Valentine leukocidin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007 Apr. 51(4):1515-9. [View Abstract]
  35. [Guideline] Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, Daum RS, Fridkin SK, Gorwitz RJ, et al. 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 Feb. 52(3):e18-55. [View Abstract]
  36. Taupin D, Karchmer AW, Davis RB, LaSalvia MT. Uncomplicated Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Treatment Duration and Outcomes at an Academic Medical Center. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2020 Oct. 7 (10):ofaa457. [View Abstract]
  37. McNeil JC, Fritz SA. Prevention Strategies for Recurrent Community-Associated Staphylococcus aureus Skin and Soft Tissue Infections. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2019 Mar 11. 21 (4):12. [View Abstract]
  38. Bai AD, Showler A, Burry L, Steinberg M, Ricciuto DR, Fernandes T, et al. Impact of Infectious Disease Consultation on Quality of Care, Mortality, and Length of Stay in Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Results From a Large Multicenter Cohort Study. Clin Infect Dis. 2015 May 15. 60 (10):1451-61. [View Abstract]
  39. Archer GL. Staphylococcus aureus: a well-armed pathogen. Clin Infect Dis. 1998 May. 26(5):1179-81. [View Abstract]
  40. Cunha BA. Antimicrobial therapy of multidrug-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Med Clin North Am. 2006 Nov. 90(6):1165-82. [View Abstract]
  41. Cunha BA. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: clinical manifestations and antimicrobial therapy. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2005 Jul. 11 Suppl 4:33-42. [View Abstract]
  42. Shi C, Xiao Y, Zhang Q, Li Q, Wang F, Wu J, et al. Efficacy and safety of cefazolin versus antistaphylococcal penicillins for the treatment of methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Oct 11. 18 (1):508. [View Abstract]
  43. Weis S, Kesselmeier M, Davis JS, Morris AM, Lee S, Scherag A, et al. Cefazolin versus anti-staphylococcal penicillins for the treatment of patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019 Mar 27. [View Abstract]
  44. Al-Hasan MN, Rac H. Transition from intravenous to oral antimicrobial therapy in patients with uncomplicated and complicated bloodstream infections. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2019 May 22. [View Abstract]
  45. Iversen K, Ihlemann N, Gill SU, Madsen T, Elming H, Jensen KT, et al. Partial Oral versus Intravenous Antibiotic Treatment of Endocarditis. N Engl J Med. 2019 Jan 31. 380 (5):415-424. [View Abstract]
  46. Bouza E. New therapeutic choices for infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2009. 15:44-52.
  47. Cunha BA. Oral antibiotic therapy of serious systemic infections. Med Clin North Am. 2006 Nov. 90(6):1197-222. [View Abstract]
  48. Proctor RA. Role of folate antagonists in the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection. Clin Infect Dis. Feb 15, 2008. 46(4):584-93. [View Abstract]
  49. Daum RS, Miller LG, Immergluck L, Fritz S, Creech CB, Young D, et al. A Placebo-Controlled Trial of Antibiotics for Smaller Skin Abscesses. N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 29. 376 (26):2545-2555. [View Abstract]
  50. Pillai SK, Wennersten C, Venkataraman L, Eliopoulos GM, Moellering RC, Karchmer AW. Development of reduced vancomycin susceptibility in methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Oct 15. 49(8):1169-74. [View Abstract]
  51. [Guideline] Rybak MJ, Lomaestro BM, Rotscahfer JC, Moellering RC, Craig WA, Billeter M, et al. Vancomycin therapeutic guidelines: a summary of consensus recommendations from the infectious diseases Society of America, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Clin Infect Dis. 2009 Aug 1. 49(3):325-7. [View Abstract]
  52. [Guideline] Rybak MJ, Le J, Lodise TP, Levine DP, Bradley JS, Liu C, et al. Therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: A revised consensus guideline and review by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2020 May 19. 77 (11):835-864. [View Abstract]
  53. Bellos I, Daskalakis G, Pergialiotis V. Relationship of vancomycin trough levels with acute kidney injury risk: an exposure-toxicity meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2020 Oct 1. 75 (10):2725-2734. [View Abstract]
  54. Lubin AS, Snydman DR, Ruthazer R, Bide P, Golan Y. Predicting high vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Apr 15. 52(8):997-1002. [View Abstract]
  55. Geriak M, Haddad F, Rizvi K, Rose W, Kullar R, LaPlante K, et al. Clinical Data on Daptomycin plus Ceftaroline versus Standard of Care Monotherapy in the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 May. 63 (5):e02483-18. [View Abstract]
  56. Cheng MP, Lawandi A, Butler-Laporte G, De l'Étoile-Morel S, Paquette K, Lee TC. Adjunctive Daptomycin in the Treatment of Methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2021 May 4. 72 (9):e196-e203. [View Abstract]
  57. Jain R, Kralovic SM, Evans ME, et al. Veterans Affairs initiative to prevent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. N Engl J Med. 2011 Apr 14. 364(15):1419-30. [View Abstract]
  58. Steed LL, Costello J, Lohia S, Jones T, Spannhake EW, Nguyen S. Reduction of nasal Staphylococcus aureus carriage in health care professionals by treatment with a nonantibiotic, alcohol-based nasal antiseptic. Am J Infect Control. 2014 Aug. 42(8):841-6. [View Abstract]
  59. WHO. Leading health agencies outline updated terminology for pathogens that transmit through the air. World Health Organization. Available at https://www.who.int/news/item/18-04-2024-leading-health-agencies-outline-updated-terminology-for-pathogens-that-transmit-through-the-air. April 18, 2024; Accessed: April 25, 2024.

Embolic lesions in patient with Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis.

Embolic lesions in patient with Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis.

Close-up view of embolic lesions in patient with Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis.

Embolic lesions in patient with Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis.

Close-up view of embolic lesions in patient with Staphylococcus aureus endocarditis.

Fifty-six-year-old man with erythema, edema, and drainage from below his right eye.

Gram stain in a 70-year-old woman with rheumatoid arthritis.