Volume 17, Issue 4 pp. 414-419

EVALUATION OF MONOSTAPH PLUS IN COMPARISON TO TWO OTHER LATEX AGGLUTINATION TESTS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION OF STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS

MARIT SØRUM

Corresponding Author

MARIT SØRUM

TEL: +45-3268-8333; FAX: +45-3268-3231; EMAIL: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
ROBERT SKOV

ROBERT SKOV

National Reference Center for Infection Control
Statens Serum Institute
5, Artillerivej, DK-2300
Copenhagen, Denmark

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 02 December 2009

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Three latex agglutination kits for rapid identification of Staphylococcus aureus were compared by testing a selection of isolates, which included methicillin resistant S. aureus, methicillin sensitive S. aureus and a diverse selection of coagulase-negative staphylococci. The sensitivities of Monostaph Plus (Bionor Laboratories, Skien, Norway), Pastorex Plus (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA) and Staphaurex Plus (Oxoid, Cambridge, UK) were 98.5, 98.3 and 98.3% respectively, and the specificities were 97.5, 97.0 and 96.5%, respectively. None of the kits detected Staphylococcus lugdunensis correctly. This evaluation shows that the Monostaph Plus agglutination kit performs well and comparable to Pastorex Staph-Plus and Staphaurex Plus.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

Latex agglutination kits are very useful in the routine identification of Staphylococcus aureus, but can occasionally give false-positive or false-negative results. Knowledge of how the various available kits are performing is, therefore, very important when selecting a kit for use. Correct identification of S. aureus is important, especially in relation to methicillin-resistant S. aureus, since other staphylococci species are known to carry the methicillin-resistance determinant mecA, but are of less clinical importance. This study is the first study comparing an improved version of the Monstaph-Plus kit with other latex agglutination kits, and provides new data about this kit.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.