Vancomycin chemical structure
Find information on thousands of medical conditions and prescription drugs.


Vancomycin is an antibiotic used in the prophylaxis and treatment of infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria. It is a branched tricyclic glycosylated nonribosomal peptide produced by the fermentation of the Actinobacteria species Amycolatopsis orientalis (formerly Nocardia orientalis). more...

Valproate semisodium
Valproic acid
Vecuronium bromide

It is often reserved as the "drug of last resort", used only after treatment with other antibiotics had failed. With the increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistant-bacteria, vancomycin has increasingly become a first line therapy when faced with Staphylococcus aureus infections in a patient where antibiotic resistance can reasonably be anticipated.

Vancomycin hydrochloride has been developed by Eli Lilly under the trade name Vancocin®. The patent expired in the early 1980s and generic versions of the drug are now available internationally under various trade names.

In 2004, Eli Lilly licensed Vancocin to ViroPharma Incorporated.

Mechanism of action

Vancomycin acts by inhibiting proper cell wall synthesis in Gram-positive bacteria. The mechanism inhibited, and various factors related to entering the outer membrane of Gram-negative organisms mean that vancomycin is not active against Gram-negative bacteria.

Specifically, vancomycin prevents incorporation of N-acetylmuramic acid (NAM)- and N-acetylglucosamine (NAG)-peptide subunits from being incorporated into the peptidoglycan matrix; which forms the major structural component of Gram-positive cell walls.

The large hydrophilic molecule is able to form hydrogen bond interactions with the terminal D-alanyl-D-alanine moieties of the NAM/NAG-peptides. Normally this is a five-point interaction. This binding of vancomycin to the D-Ala-D-Ala prevents the incorporation of the NAM/NAG-peptide subunits into the peptidoglycan matrix.

Vancomycin has two chemically distinct rotamers owing to the rotational restriction of the chlorotyrosine residue (on the right hand side of the figure). The form present in the drug is the thermodynamically more stable conformer, and, importantly, has more potent activity. Vancomycin also displays atropisomerism.

Therapeutic considerations


Vancomycin has traditionally been considered a nephrotoxic and ototoxic drug, based on observations by early investigators of elevated serum levels in renally impaired patients who had experienced ototoxicity, and subsequently through case reports in the medical literature. However, as the use of vancomycin increased with the spread of MRSA beginning in the seventies, it was recognized that the previously reported rates of toxicity were not being observed. This was attributed to the removal of the impurities present in the earlier formulation of the drug, although those impurities were not specifically tested for toxicity.


Subsequent reviews of accumulated case reports of vancomycin-related nephrotoxicity found that many of the patients had also received other known nephrotoxins, particularly aminoglycosides. Most of the rest had other confounding factors, or insufficient data regarding the possibility of such, that prohibited the clear association of vancomycin with the observed renal dysfunction. In 1994, in the largest systematic review to date, Cantu et al found that the use of vancomycin monotherapy was clearly documented in only three of 82 available cases in the literature. Prospective and retrospective studies attempting to evaluate the incidence of vancomycin-related nephrotoxicity have largely been methodologically flawed and have produced variable results. The most methodologically sound investigations indicate that the actual incidence of vancomycin-induced nephrotoxicity is around 5% to 7%. To put this into context, similar rates of renal dysfunction have been reported for cefamandole and penicillin, two reputedly non-nephrotoxic antibiotics. Additionally, evidence to relate nephrotoxicity to vancomycin serum levels is inconsistent. Some studies have indicated an increased rate of nephrotoxicity when trough levels exceed 10 mcg/ml, but others have not reproduced these results. Nephrotoxicity has also been observed with concentrations within the ‘therapeutic” range as well. Essentially, the reputation of vancomycin as a nephrotoxin is over-stated, and it has not been demonstrated that maintaining vancomycin serum levels within certain ranges will prevent its nephrotoxic effects, when they do occur.


[List your site here Free!]

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci co-colonization
From Emerging Infectious Diseases, 10/1/05 by Jon P. Furuno

We assessed the prevalence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of patients co-colonized with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) upon admission to the medical and surgical intensive care units (ICUs) of a tertiary-care facility between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2003. Co-colonization was defined as a VRE-positive perirectal surveillance culture with an MRSA-positive anterior nares surveillance culture collected concurrently. Among 2,440 patients, 65 (2.7%) were co-colonized. Independent risk factors included age (odds ratio [OR] 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.05), admission to the medical ICU (OR 4.38, 95% CI 2.46-7.81), male sex (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.14-3.30), and receiving antimicrobial drugs on a previous admission within 1 year (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.85-5.07). None of the co-colonized patients would have been identified with clinical cultures alone. We report a high prevalence of VRE/MRSA co-colonization upon admission to ICUs at a tertiary-care hospital.


Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) cause nosocomial infections and are associated with increased rates of illness and death (1,2). Both organisms are now endemic in many healthcare institutions, particularly in intensive care units (ICUs) (3). Vancomycin is commonly used to treat infections caused by MRSA; however, recent emergence of S. aureus infections with high-level resistance to vancomycin call into question the future effectiveness of vancomycin for these nosocomial infections (4). All known vancomycin-resistant S. aureus (VRSA) isolates reported thus far have possessed the vanA gene, which confers resistance to vancomycin and is believed to have been acquired when an MRSA isolate conjugated with a co-colonizing VRE isolate (5-10). Thus, patients simultaneously co-colonized with MRSA and VRE are likely at increased risk for colonization or infection by VRSA.

Patients in the 1CU and other critically ill patients are at high risk for co-colonization with MRSA and VRE and, possibly, VRSA, since both organisms are endemic and associated with increased illness severity (11,12). Despite the high risk, epidemiologic risk factors associated with co-colonization by MRSA and VRE in patients admitted to ICUs have not been described. In addition, previous studies in this population have been limited by the use of clinical cultures as markers for colonization, which underestimate the true proportion of patients colonized with these resistant organisms (13-15).

To our knowledge, this study is the first to assess independent risk factors and outcomes for patients co-colonized with VRE and MRSA. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of patients who are co-colonized by VRE and MRSA upon admission to the medical and surgical ICUs of a tertiary-care facility.


Study Design and Patient Population

This study was approved by the institutional review board of the University of Maryland, Baltimore. This study utilized a prospective cohort of adult patients admitted to the medical ICU (MICU) and surgical ICU (SICU) of the University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC) between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2003. UMMC is a tertiary-care facility in Baltimore, Maryland. The MICU is a 10-bed, private room unit providing care to patients who have acute or potentially life-threatening medical conditions including hematologic and other malignancies. The SICU is a 19-bed, private room unit providing care to adult patients with solid organ transplantation and abdominal, genitourinary, orthopedic, and otolaryngologic surgery.

During the study period, routine surveillance cultures of the anterior nares for MRSA and perirectal area for VRE were obtained from patients within 48 hours of admission to both ICUs for infection control purposes. Cultures were obtained from an average of 80% of admitted patients. Patients from whom both cultures were not obtained upon ICU admission or had an ICU length of stay <5 hours were excluded. Patients may have had multiple admissions during the study period, and all eligible admissions were included in this analysis.

Data Collection and Variables

All data were abstracted from the UMMC central data repository that contains the patients' electronic medical records. The validity of these data was assessed by randomly sampling 10% of the patients' electronic data records and comparing them to the original paper medical records. The positive and negative predictive values of this assessment exceeded 99% for both validity measures, which was similar to values seen in previous studies with this same data source (16-19).

Co-colonization by VRE and MRSA upon ICU admission was defined as a positive surveillance culture of the perirectal area for VRE and a positive surveillance culture of the anterior nares for MRSA within 48 hours of admission to either the MICU or SICU. All coexisting conditions were defined by using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (20).

Laboratory Methods

All media and reagents were from BD Biosciences (San Jose, CA, USA) unless otherwise noted. S. aureus was isolated from both anterior nares and perirectal cultures. Nares swabs were plated on tryptic soy agar with 5% sheep blood to isolate S. aureus. Plates were examined at 24 and 48 hours for creamy, golden [beta]-hemolytic colonies typical of S. aureus. Perirectal swabs were plated on both tryptic soy agar with 5% sheep blood and phenylethyl alcohol agar (Remel, Lenexa, KS, USA) and cultured in Baird Staphylococcus Enrichment broth (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany). Presumptive S. aureus colonies were confirmed by positive catalase and Murex Staphaurex (Remel) reactions. MRSA were identified by growth on Mueller Hinton agar with 4% NaCl and 6 [micro]g/mL oxacillin.

Enterococci were isolated by plating perirectal swabs on Columbia Modified CNA agar and examined at 24 and 48 hours. Presumptive enterococci colonies that were gram-positive cocci, catalase negative, and pyrrolidonyl-[beta]-naphthylamide positive were plated on vancomycin screening agar and motility agar. Vancomycin-resistant, nonmotile enterococci were identified as VRE.

Statistical Analyses

Three risk factor analyses were conducted: 1) VRE/MRSA co-colonized patients were compared to all other ICU patients, 2) patients colonized with VRE alone were compared to patients not colonized with VRE, and 3) patients colonized with MRSA alone were compared to patients not colonized with MRSA. Patients co-colonized with MRSA or VRE were excluded for analyses 2 and 3 above that compared solitary VRE or MRSA colonization to noncolonized patients.

Student t, chi-square, Fisher exact, and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used for descriptive analyses to assess bivariable differences between groups. All variables that were significant ([alpha] = 0.1) in the bivariable analyses were included in the initial (full) multivariable logistic regression model. In each of the multivariable analyses performed, variables not significantly associated ([alpha] = 0.05) with the outcome (VRE/MRSA co-colonization and VRE or MRSA solitary colonization upon admission to the ICU) were removed from the model. Each of the removed variables was then reinserted into the model to assess if its presence altered the regression coefficient by [greater than or equal to] 20%. If so, this risk factor was included in the final model. The resulting multivariable logistic regression model was considered the final model and was used to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the remaining risk factors.

Differences in patients' clinical outcomes after assessing colonization status were also assessed. These variables included length of stay after the ICU admission culture, subsequent positive clinical cultures for VRE or MRSA, in-hospital death rate, and readmission to the index hospital or transfer to another healthcare facility. Subsequent positive clinical cultures were limited to sterile sites, and thus only blood, cerebrospinal fluid, or urine cultures were considered.


During the 2-year cohort period (January 1, 2002-December 31, 2003), 3,090 patients were admitted to the MICU or SICU for a >5-hour stay. Of these, 2,440 patients (79.0%) had both anterior nares and perirectal admission cultures collected. Sixty-five patients (2.7%) were co-colonized with VRE and MRSA, 247 patients (10.1%) were colonized with VRE alone, and 175 patients (7.2%) were colonized with MRSA alone. Of the 57 MRSA/VRE co-colonized patients with perirectal samples available for additional analysis, 23 patients (40.4%) were perirectally colonized with MRSA in addition to perirectal VRE and MRSA nasal colonization. Results of the bivariable analyses for VRE/MRSA co-colonization are displayed in Table 1. Because of space constraints, bivariable results for colonization by MRSA or VRE alone are not shown. These results suggest that patients colonized with VRE, MRSA, or both were significantly more likely to have been admitted to the MICU, have had previous hospital admissions, and have antimicrobial exposures within 1 year of current admission (p<0.05 for all). Among co-colonized patients, 58% had been admitted to the index hospital in the previous year, and 51% had received antimicrobial drugs during an admission in the previous year. In addition, [approximately equal to] 48% of MRSA/VRE co-colonized patients had a previous positive culture (clinical or surveillance) for MRSA before the study period, and [approximately equal to] 28% had a previous positive culture for VRE.

Independent risk factors identified with logistic regression for the different colonization states (co-colonization, VRE only, or MRSA only) were markedly different (Table 2). Table 3 displays clinical outcomes of VRE/MRSA co-colonized patients. Approximately 25% percent of co-colonized patients died during the current admission; however, mortality was not significantly higher compared to non-co-colonized patients (p = 0.15). Three percent of co-colonized patients had MRSA-positive clinical cultures, and 3% of co-colonized patients had VRE-positive clinical cultures on the current or subsequent admissions (within 6 months). None of the co-colonized patients had clinical cultures positive for both organisms. Thirty-two percent of VRE/MRSA co-colonized patients were transferred to another hospital upon discharge from the index hospital compared with 15% of non-co-colonized patients (p<0.01).


Increasing VRSA prevalence in the healthcare setting could result in considerable illness and death (21). To our knowledge, we present the first estimates of the prevalence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of patients with VRE and MRSA co-colonization. As has been previously reported, co-colonization with VRE and MRSA has always preceded VRSA colonization or infection, and patients admitted to ICUs are likely a high-risk population (11-13,15). We show that among patients who had admission cultures taken, 4.6% admitted to the MICU and 1.2% admitted to the SICU of a tertiary-care facility during a 2-year period were co-colonized with MRSA and VRE, with an overall co-colonization proportion of 3% in both ICUs together. In addition, the observation that [approximately equal to] 40% of MRSA/VRE co-colonized patients were perirectally colonized with both organisms suggests the potential risk for the exchange of genetic material, which could result in the emergence of VRSA.

None of the 65 VRE/MRSA-co-colonized patients had positive clinical cultures for both VRE and MRSA on current or subsequent admissions to the index hospital. Thus, none would have been identified as co-colonized without the active surveillance culturing program in place at our institution. As has been suggested by previously reported cases of VRSA, early identification of these patients is recommended to minimize antimicrobial selective pressure and enhance infection control efforts to reduce the potential for patient-to-patient transmission (5,7).

In this study, <25% of co-colonized patients died, and nearly 35% were discharged to other hospitals or rehabilitation facilities, where the risk of transmitting these organisms to other patients is substantial. Considering the potential for colonization, infection, and transmission of VRSA, treating physicians, hospital staff, and infection control personnel at receiving institutions must be adequately prepared to isolate and treat these patients (22,23). Previous studies of transmission from vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (VISA)- or VRSA-colonized or infected patients show that these organisms can be transmitted to close contacts or other hospitalized patients (7,21,24).

Previous studies have also shown that carriage of VRE or MRSA may be persistent, which would increase the potential for co-colonized patients to transmit either or both of these organisms to other patients (25,26). A mathematical model of the transmission dynamics of VRE has suggested that persistent colonization is the most important factor for increasing the endemic prevalence of this organism in the hospital (26). Furthermore, the potential for prolonged co-colonization could increase the likelihood that these patients would experience sufficient selective pressure for emergence of VRSA.

Recent reviews by Reuf, Fridkin, and Cosgrove et al. have summarized risk factors associated with clinical culture positivity for VRSA and VISA (4,22,23). However, with only 3 reported cases of VRSA and [approximately equal to] 20 reported cases of VISA, the precision of statistical associations has been limited. Recent exposure to vancomycin and recent isolation of MRSA were identified as risk factors for VISA in addition to concurrent colonization or infection with VRE and MRSA. Among co-colonized patients in this study, [approximately equal to] 21% received vancomycin, 26% received piperacillin-tazobactam, and 17% received a fluoroquinolone before culture results.

This study is the first to report the prevalence, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of patients with VRE/MRSA co-colonization upon admission to the ICU. We report several risk-factors for co-colonization, including that the odds of co-colonization for patients admitted to the MICU were >4 times greater than those of patients admitted to the SICU and that patients who received antimicrobial drugs within 1 year of admission had 3 times the odds of co-colonization as patients who had not received antimicrobial drugs during a previous admission.

Ray et al. assessed the prevalence of gastrointestinal S. aureus colonization among a convenience sample of 37 patients colonized with VRE and reported that 20 (54.1%) of these patients were also colonized with MRSA (27). However, comparing these results to those presented here is difficult, given the stark differences between patient groups. The study by Ray et al. included only hospitalized patients from whom a minimum of 3 stool samples (collected weekly) were obtained (i.e., inpatients with extended lengths of stay). We believe that ICU patients co-colonized with VRE and MRSA are at risk of acquiring and transmitting VRSA because they generally are exposed to greater antimicrobial selective pressure, have extended lengths of stay, greater likelihood of indwelling devices, greater severity of illness, and are more likely to have a history of previous hospitalization and related exposures than patients admitted to general medical wards. Despite these differences, perirectal colonization of both organisms was similar between the patients in the study by Ray et al. and this study (54.1% vs. 40.3%, respectively). Other studies have also suggested a prevalence of VRE/MRSA co-colonization or co-infection ranging from 9.5% to 28.6%; however, these studies relied upon clinical cultures to provide these estimates (14,15).

A limitation of this study is that investigators were unable to determine the species of the VRE isolates. Historically, Enterococcus faecalis has been more likely to be associated with conjugation events and subsequent VRSA colonization or infection compared with E. faecium (7,28). However, only 3 VRSA cases are known, and we are not aware of any biologic explanation for why E. faecium would be less likely to be involved in transmission of vancomycin resistance to MRSA compared with E. faecalis. Still, these data would have been useful and informative. A previous, hospitalwide study at UMMC suggested that among isolated VRE, the prevalence of E. faecium and E. faecalis were 87%, and 13%, respectively (29).

In summary, these data describe a high prevalence of patients co-colonized with VRE and MRSA on admission to an ICU at a tertiary-care hospital, none of whom would have been detected by clinical culture. Risk factors for VRE and MRSA co-colonization are also described. Given that many of these patients were discharged to other institutions, treating physicians and infection control personnel must be cognizant of the risks for VRSA colonization and infection and use appropriate precautions. Appropriate methods to rapidly detect co-colonized patients must be identified to suppress the emergence of VRSA; limit patient-to-patient transmission of MRSA, VRE, and VRSA; and prevent endemic VRSA colonization in healthcare institutions.


We thank Colleen Reilly and Jingkun Zhu for database maintenance and abstraction.

Financial support was provided by Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service Research Career Development Award (RCD-02026-1 to E.N.P.) and National Institutes of Health (K23 AI01752-01A1 to A.D.H.). Funding organizations provided salary support only for stated investigators.


(1.) National Nosocomial Infections Surveillance (NNIS) System Report, data summary from January 1992 through June 2003, issued August 2003. Am J Infect Control. 2003;31:481-98.

(2.) Cosgrove SE, Sakoulas G, Perencevich EN, Schwaber M J, Karchmer

AW, Carmeli Y. Comparison of mortality associated with methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36:53-9.

(3.) Murray BE. Vancomycin-resistant enterococcal infections. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:710-21.

(4.) Ruef C. Epidemiology and clinical impact of glycopeptide resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Infection. 2004;32:315-27.

(5.) Whitener CJ, Park SY, Browne FA, Parent LJ, Julian K, Bozdogan B, et al. Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the absence of vancomycin exposure. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38:1049-55.

(6.) Tenover FC, Weigel LM, Appelbaum PC, McDougal LK, Chaitram J, McAllister S, et al. Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolate from a patient in Pennsylvania. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:275-80.

(7.) Chang S, Sievert DM, Hageman JC, Boulton ML, Tenover FC, Dowries FP, et al. Infection with vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus containing the vanA resistance gene. N Engl J Med. 2003:348:1342-7.

(8.) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus Pennsylvania, 2002. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002;51:902.

(9.) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus--New York, 2004. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004;53:322-3.

(10.) Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus--Pennsylvania, 2002. JAMA. 2002;288: 2116.

(11.) Merrer J, Santoli F, Appere de Vecchi C, Tran B, De Jonghe B, Outin H. "Colonization pressure" and risk of acquisition of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a medical intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2000;21:718-23.

(12.) Bonten MJ, Slaughter S, Ambergen AW, Hayden MK, van Voorbis J, Mathan C, et al. The role of "colonization pressure" in the spread of vancomycin-resistant enterococci: an important infection control variable. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1127-32.

(13.) McDonald JR, Engemann JJ, Kaye KS, Sexton DJ. Co-infection or co-colonization with vancomycin-resistant enterococci and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a network of community hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2004;25:622.

(14.) Franchi D, Climo MW, Wong AH, Edmond MB, Wenzel RP. Seeking vancomycin resistant Staphylococcus aureus among patients with vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Clin Infect Dis. 1999:29:1566-8.

(15.) Warren DK, Nitro A, Hill C, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH. Occurrence of co-colonization or co-infection with vancomycin-resistant enterococci and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a medical intensive care unit. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2004:25:99-104.

(16.) McGregor JC, Kim PW, Perencevich EN, Bradham DD, Furuno JP, Kaye KS, et al. Utility of the chronic disease score and Charlson comorbidity index as comorbidity measures for use in epidemiologic studies of antibiotic-resistant organisms. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;161:483-93.

(17.) Harris AD, Smith D, Johnson JA, Bradham DD, Roghmann MC. Risk factors for imipenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa among hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34:340-5.

(18.) Furuno JR Harris AD. Wright MO, McGregor JC, Venezia RA, Zhu J, et al. Prediction rules to identify patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci upon hospital admission. Am J Infect Control. 2004;32:436-40.

(19.) Kim PW, Harris AD, Roghmann MC, Morris JG Jr. Strinivasan A, Perencevich EN. Epidemiological risk factors for isolation of ceftriaxone-resistant versus -susceptible Citrobacter freundii in hospitalized patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:2882-7.

(20.) Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Ciol MA. Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:613-9.

(21.) Smith TL, Pearson ML, Wilcox KR, Cruz C, Lancaster MV, Robinson-Dunn B, et ah Emergence of vancomycin resistance in Staphylococcus aureus. Glycopeptide-intermediate Staphylococcus aureus Working Group. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:493-501.

(22.) Fridkin SK. Vancomycin-intermediate and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus: what the infections disease specialist needs to know. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32:108-15.

(23.) Cosgrove SE, Carroll KC, Perl TM. Staphylococcus aureus with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:5394-5.

(24). Srinivasan A, Dick JD, Perl TM. Vancomycin resistance in staphylococci. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2002;15:430-8.

(25.) Harbarth S, Liassine N, Dharan S, Herrault P, Auckenthaler R, Pittet D. Risk factors for persistent carriage of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis. 2000;31:1380-5.

(26). D'Agata EM, Horn MA, Webb GF. The impact of persistent gastrointestinal colonization on the transmission dynamics of vancomycin-resistant enterococci. J Infect Dis. 2002;185:766-73.

(27.) Ray AJ, Pultz NJ, Bhalla A, Aron DC, Donskey CJ. Coexistence of vancomycin-resistant enterococci and Staphylococcus altreus in the intestinal tracts of hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;37:875-81.

(28.) Noble WC, Virani Z, Cree RG. Co-transfer of vancomycin and other resistance genes from Enterococcus faecalis NCTC 12201 to Staphylococcus aureus. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 1992;72:195-8.

(29.) Morris JG Jr, Shay DK, Hebden JN, McCarter RJ Jr, Perdue BE, Jarvis W, et al. Enterococci resistant to multiple antimicrobial agents, including vancomycin. Establishment of endemicity in a university medical center. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:250-9.

Jon P. Furuno, * Eli N. Perencevich, * ([dagger]) ([double dagger]) Judith A. Johnson, * ([dagger]) Marc-Oliver Wright, ([double dagger]) (2) Jessina C. McGregor, * J. Glenn Morris Jr, * ([dagger]) Sandra M. Strauss, * Mary-Claire Roghman, * ([dagger]) Lucia L. Nemoy, * ([dagger]) Harold C. Standiford, ([double dagger]) Joan N. Hebden, ([double dagger]) and Anthony D. Harris * ([dagger]) ([double dagger])

* University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; ([dagger]) Veteran's Affairs Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; and ([double dagger]) University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

(1) These data were presented in part at the 44th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, Washington DC, September 2004.

(2) Current affiliation: Marshfield Clinic Research Foundation, Marshfield, Wisconsin, USA.

Dr Furuno is an instructor in the Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine at the University of Maryland School of Medicine and coordinator of the Maryland Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet). His primary research interests include antimicrobial resistance, foodborne disease, and epidemiologic methodology.

Address for correspondence: Jon P. Euruno, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, 100 N Greene St, Lower Level, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA: Fax: 410-706-0098; email:

COPYRIGHT 2005 U.S. National Center for Infectious Diseases
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group

Return to Vancomycin
Home Contact Resources Exchange Links ebay