Search

Mechanisms of protective immunity to Staphylococcus aureus infection in humans remain elusive. While the importance of cellular immunity has been shown in mice, T cell responses in humans have not been characterised. Using a murine model of recurrent S. aureus peritonitis, we demonstrated that prior exposure to S. aureus enhanced IFN gamma responses upon subsequent infection, while adoptive transfer of S. aureus antigen-specific Th1 cells was protective in naive mice. Translating these findings, we found that S. aureus antigen-specific Th1 cells were also significantly expanded during human S. aureus bloodstream infection (BSI). These Th1 cells were CD45RO(+), indicative of a memory phenotype. Thus, exposure to S. aureus induces memory Th1 cells in mice and humans, identifying Th1 cells as potential S. aureus vaccine targets. Consequently, we developed a model vaccine comprising staphylococcal clumping factor A, which we demonstrate to be an effective human T cell antigen, combined with the Th1-driving adjuvant CpG. This novel Th1-inducing vaccine conferred significant protection during S. aureus infection in mice. This study notably advances our understanding of S. aureus cellular immunity, and demonstrates for the first time that a correlate of S. aureus protective immunity identified in mice may be relevant in humans.

1 januari 2011, Item does not contain fulltext, A symposium was held in June 2009 near Freiburg in Germany. Twenty-nine attendees from several European countries participated, most of whom are actively involved in research and hospital infection prevention and control. The following topics were presented and discussed: isolation and screening for control of multidrug-resistant organisms; impact of the environment on healthcare-associated infection (HAI); new technologies to control infection--state of evidence; surveillance of HAI; methodological challenges and research priorities for infection control and control of HAI: learning from each other in a united Europe. This Leader summarises the main issues for debate and the number of consensus points agreed amongst delegates.

Microorganisms spread across national boundaries and the professional activities of clinical (medical) microbiologists are critical in minimising their impact. Clinical microbiologists participate in many activities, e.g. diagnosis, antibiotic therapy, and there is a need for a set of professional standards for Europe with a common curriculum, to build upon the current strengths of the specialty and to facilitate the free movement of specialists within the European Union. Such standards will also better highlight the important contribution of clinical microbiologists to healthcare. There is a move to larger centralised microbiology laboratories often located off-site from an acute hospital, driven by the concentration of resources, amalgamation of services, outsourcing of diagnostics, automation, an explosion in the range of staff competencies and accreditation. Large off-site centralised microbiology laboratories are often distant to the patient and may not facilitate the early detection of microbial spread. Ultimately, the needs of patients and the public are paramount in deciding on the future direction of clinical microbiology. Potential conflicts between integration on an acute hospital site and centralisation can be resolved by a common set of professional standards and a team-based approach that puts patients first.

Recent efforts to combat infections have focused on pharmaceutical interventions. However, the global spread of antimicrobial resistance calls for the reappraisal of personal and institutional hygiene. Hygiene embodies behavioural and procedural rules that prevent bacterial transmission. Consequently, the chance of spreading bacteria such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is significantly reduced. Hygiene is part of the primacy and totality of patient care, ensuring that no harm is done. Any prevention and control strategy must be underpinned by changes in attitude, embraced by all. The major components of preventing and controlling MRSA include hand and environmental hygiene (as part of standard precautions), patient isolation, and patient/staff decolonization. Improving hand hygiene practice is especially important where the risk of infection is highest, e.g. in intensive care. Physical isolation has two advantages: the physical barrier interrupts transmission, and this barrier emphasizes that precautions are required. With limited isolation facilities, risk assessment should be conducted to indicate which patients should be isolated. Environmental hygiene, although important, has a lower priority than standard precautions. When a patient is ready for discharge (home) or transfer (to another healthcare facility), the overall interests of the patient should take priority. All patients should be informed of their MRSA-positive status as soon as possible. Because of increased mupirocin resistance, a selective approach to decolonization should be taken. When MRSA-positive staff are identified, restricting their professional activity will depend on the nature of their work. Finally, politicians and others need to commit to providing the necessary resources to maximize MRSA prevention and control.