Are all MRSA made equal?

The health and economic burden of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in the medical realm is considerable. Although there is ample clinical and laboratory evidence indicating that methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) is heterogeneous in disease causation, the same heterogeneity has not been well documented for MRSA. Data from animal models and human studies suggest that MRSA is at least as pathogenic as MSSA. Many comparative clinical studies, mainly retrospective, have assessed the virulence of MSSA and MRSA. Whereas the majority of these studies may be deficient in some aspects of clinical design, there has been a definite trend towards implicating MRSA as the more aggressive pathogen. Such an observation, however, must be tempered with the fact that few such studies have attempted to establish clonality among MRSA isolates. Thus, it is conceivable that hypervirulent clones may represent an important proportion of MRSA from hospital studies where patient-patient spread is likely and, accordingly, comparative studies may be biased. Future clinical studies should be prospective and should use well-defined and homogeneous patient groups. As well, for comparison of MRSA and MSSA, an understanding of clonality is essential.