Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci

Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Stap...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases 2000-06, Vol.19 (6), p.403-417
Hauptverfasser: BIAVASCO, F, VIGNAROLI, C, VARALDO, P. E
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 417
container_issue 6
container_start_page 403
container_title European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases
container_volume 19
creator BIAVASCO, F
VIGNAROLI, C
VARALDO, P. E
description Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s100960000299
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71745558</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2369994101</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c176bb630ae6fc9717a503dc0be2215261b3d73ad15661e09ee29d6930facb603</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0c1LwzAYBvAgipvTo1cZIt6qb5ImafAkQ6cw8KLnkqZvZ0bX1KYV9t-bsYEfF3NIDvnxkPcJIecUbiiAug1x1xLiYlofkDFNuUhSrvghGYPmaaIV4yNyEsIqGpUpdUxGFHSqGE3H5G5eb6xvse1didMOgwu9aSxOXTO13iyH2gRMGlya3n3iNF6275vaW2-tOyVHlakDnu3PCXl7fHidPSWLl_nz7H6R2JRBn1iqZFFIDgZlZbWiygjgpYUCGaOCSVrwUnFTUiElRdCITJdSc6iMLSTwCbne5bad_xgw9PnaBYt1bRr0Q8hjYiqEyP6F8SFMiUxHePkHrvzQNXGIPFMUqFKwTUt2yHY-hA6rvO3c2nSbnEK-7T7_1X30F_vQoVhj-UPvyo7gag9MsKauuli0C98u_prSGf8CeE6KBw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>871017708</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals</source><creator>BIAVASCO, F ; VIGNAROLI, C ; VARALDO, P. E</creator><creatorcontrib>BIAVASCO, F ; VIGNAROLI, C ; VARALDO, P. E</creatorcontrib><description>Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0934-9723</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1435-4373</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s100960000299</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10947214</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Berlin: Springer</publisher><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology ; Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use ; Antibacterial agents ; Antibiotics ; Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents ; Bacterial infections ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical medicine ; Coagulase - metabolism ; Drug Resistance, Microbial ; glycopeptide antibiotics ; Gram-positive bacteria ; Humans ; Infections ; Laboratories ; Medical sciences ; Microbial Sensitivity Tests ; Pathogens ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments ; Population studies ; Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy ; Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology ; Staphylococcus - drug effects ; Staphylococcus - enzymology ; Staphylococcus - genetics ; Staphylococcus epidermidis ; Staphylococcus haemolyticus ; Teicoplanin - pharmacology ; Teicoplanin - therapeutic use ; Toxicity ; Vancomycin - pharmacology ; Vancomycin - therapeutic use ; Vancomycin Resistance</subject><ispartof>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases, 2000-06, Vol.19 (6), p.403-417</ispartof><rights>2000 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c176bb630ae6fc9717a503dc0be2215261b3d73ad15661e09ee29d6930facb603</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=1437798$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10947214$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>BIAVASCO, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VIGNAROLI, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VARALDO, P. E</creatorcontrib><title>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</title><title>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases</title><addtitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</addtitle><description>Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown.</description><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</subject><subject>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Antibacterial agents</subject><subject>Antibiotics</subject><subject>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</subject><subject>Bacterial infections</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical medicine</subject><subject>Coagulase - metabolism</subject><subject>Drug Resistance, Microbial</subject><subject>glycopeptide antibiotics</subject><subject>Gram-positive bacteria</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Laboratories</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</subject><subject>Pathogens</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><subject>Population studies</subject><subject>Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy</subject><subject>Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology</subject><subject>Staphylococcus - drug effects</subject><subject>Staphylococcus - enzymology</subject><subject>Staphylococcus - genetics</subject><subject>Staphylococcus epidermidis</subject><subject>Staphylococcus haemolyticus</subject><subject>Teicoplanin - pharmacology</subject><subject>Teicoplanin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Toxicity</subject><subject>Vancomycin - pharmacology</subject><subject>Vancomycin - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Vancomycin Resistance</subject><issn>0934-9723</issn><issn>1435-4373</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2000</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0c1LwzAYBvAgipvTo1cZIt6qb5ImafAkQ6cw8KLnkqZvZ0bX1KYV9t-bsYEfF3NIDvnxkPcJIecUbiiAug1x1xLiYlofkDFNuUhSrvghGYPmaaIV4yNyEsIqGpUpdUxGFHSqGE3H5G5eb6xvse1didMOgwu9aSxOXTO13iyH2gRMGlya3n3iNF6275vaW2-tOyVHlakDnu3PCXl7fHidPSWLl_nz7H6R2JRBn1iqZFFIDgZlZbWiygjgpYUCGaOCSVrwUnFTUiElRdCITJdSc6iMLSTwCbne5bad_xgw9PnaBYt1bRr0Q8hjYiqEyP6F8SFMiUxHePkHrvzQNXGIPFMUqFKwTUt2yHY-hA6rvO3c2nSbnEK-7T7_1X30F_vQoVhj-UPvyo7gag9MsKauuli0C98u_prSGf8CeE6KBw</recordid><startdate>20000601</startdate><enddate>20000601</enddate><creator>BIAVASCO, F</creator><creator>VIGNAROLI, C</creator><creator>VARALDO, P. E</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQGLB</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20000601</creationdate><title>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</title><author>BIAVASCO, F ; VIGNAROLI, C ; VARALDO, P. E</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c420t-c176bb630ae6fc9717a503dc0be2215261b3d73ad15661e09ee29d6930facb603</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2000</creationdate><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology</topic><topic>Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Antibacterial agents</topic><topic>Antibiotics</topic><topic>Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents</topic><topic>Bacterial infections</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical medicine</topic><topic>Coagulase - metabolism</topic><topic>Drug Resistance, Microbial</topic><topic>glycopeptide antibiotics</topic><topic>Gram-positive bacteria</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Laboratories</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Microbial Sensitivity Tests</topic><topic>Pathogens</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><topic>Population studies</topic><topic>Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy</topic><topic>Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology</topic><topic>Staphylococcus - drug effects</topic><topic>Staphylococcus - enzymology</topic><topic>Staphylococcus - genetics</topic><topic>Staphylococcus epidermidis</topic><topic>Staphylococcus haemolyticus</topic><topic>Teicoplanin - pharmacology</topic><topic>Teicoplanin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Toxicity</topic><topic>Vancomycin - pharmacology</topic><topic>Vancomycin - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Vancomycin Resistance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>BIAVASCO, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VIGNAROLI, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VARALDO, P. E</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health &amp; Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Applied &amp; Life Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>BIAVASCO, F</au><au>VIGNAROLI, C</au><au>VARALDO, P. E</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci</atitle><jtitle>European journal of clinical microbiology &amp; infectious diseases</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis</addtitle><date>2000-06-01</date><risdate>2000</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>403</spage><epage>417</epage><pages>403-417</pages><issn>0934-9723</issn><eissn>1435-4373</eissn><abstract>Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CNS) were the first organisms in which acquired glycopeptide resistance was recognized. Ever since the early reports, it has been apparent that resistance to teicoplanin is more common than that to vancomycin and that resistance occurs mostly in species such as Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of teicoplanin for CNS usually fall over a wide range, and, especially in some methicillin-resistant isolates of the two above-mentioned species, they can reach and even exceed the resistance breakpoint, whereas vancomycin MICs tend to remain more stable over a narrower range within the limits of susceptibility. CNS strains intermediately susceptible and even resistant not only to teicoplanin but also to vancomycin have, however, been isolated, most frequently from patients subjected to prolonged glycopeptide treatment. Laboratory detection of glycopeptide-resistant CNS may be problematic, mainly because susceptibility tests, particularly those for teicoplanin, are influenced by various technical factors, and agar diffusion tests may yield false susceptibility data. In studies with experimental glycopeptides, some molecules have exhibited improved in vitro activity compared with teicoplanin and vancomycin, but these encouraging microbiological findings have not usually been followed by in vivo trials. Stepwise and single-step exposure to teicoplanin and vancomycin has allowed stable clones for which glycopeptide MICs are increased to be obtained from susceptible CNS strains, particularly strains of Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Staphylococcus epidermidis. In these studies, resistance to teicoplanin was generally easier to obtain than resistance to vancomycin, and the levels of teicoplanin resistance were higher. Population studies have demonstrated the usually heterogeneous nature of glycopeptide resistance in CNS. Although glycopeptide-resistant CNS have been shown to differ in several features from their glycopeptide-susceptible counterparts, the exact mechanism of staphylococcal glycopeptide resistance remains unknown.</abstract><cop>Berlin</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>10947214</pmid><doi>10.1007/s100960000299</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0934-9723
ispartof European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases, 2000-06, Vol.19 (6), p.403-417
issn 0934-9723
1435-4373
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71745558
source MEDLINE; Springer Nature - Complete Springer Journals
subjects Anti-Bacterial Agents - pharmacology
Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use
Antibacterial agents
Antibiotics
Antibiotics. Antiinfectious agents. Antiparasitic agents
Bacterial infections
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical medicine
Coagulase - metabolism
Drug Resistance, Microbial
glycopeptide antibiotics
Gram-positive bacteria
Humans
Infections
Laboratories
Medical sciences
Microbial Sensitivity Tests
Pathogens
Pharmacology. Drug treatments
Population studies
Staphylococcal Infections - drug therapy
Staphylococcal Infections - microbiology
Staphylococcus - drug effects
Staphylococcus - enzymology
Staphylococcus - genetics
Staphylococcus epidermidis
Staphylococcus haemolyticus
Teicoplanin - pharmacology
Teicoplanin - therapeutic use
Toxicity
Vancomycin - pharmacology
Vancomycin - therapeutic use
Vancomycin Resistance
title Glycopeptide resistance in coagulase-negative staphylococci
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T17%3A54%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Glycopeptide%20resistance%20in%20coagulase-negative%20staphylococci&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20clinical%20microbiology%20&%20infectious%20diseases&rft.au=BIAVASCO,%20F&rft.date=2000-06-01&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=403&rft.epage=417&rft.pages=403-417&rft.issn=0934-9723&rft.eissn=1435-4373&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s100960000299&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2369994101%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=871017708&rft_id=info:pmid/10947214&rfr_iscdi=true