\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter \IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}% {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}% {\RequirePackage{color}} \usepackage{colortbl} \usepackage{wrapfig} \usepackage{ifxetex} \ifxetex \usepackage{fontspec} \usepackage{xunicode} \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash} \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{} \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}} \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}} \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}} \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}} \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono} \else \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}% {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc} \PrerenderUnicode{–} }% {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}} \usepackage[english]{babel} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage{float} \usepackage[]{ucs} \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash } \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{} \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}} \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}} \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,} \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ } \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>} \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}} \def\textJapanese{} \def\textChinese{} \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{} \fi \def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small} \DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25} \usepackage{relsize} \RequirePackage{array} \def\@testpach{\@chclass \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@ \else \z@ \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}% \@chnum \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else \z@ \@chclass \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else \if \@nextchar !6 \else \if \@nextchar @7 \else \if \@nextchar (8 \else \if \@nextchar )9 \else 10 \@chnum \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else \if \@nextchar p4 \else \if \@nextchar b5 \else \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi} \gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr} \def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}} \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \def\abbr{} \def\corr{} \def\expan{} \def\gap{} \def\orig{} \def\reg{} \def\ref{} \def\sic{} \def\persName{}\def\name{} \def\placeName{} \def\orgName{} \def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}} \def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}} \def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}} \def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}} \def\textquoted#1{‘#1’} \def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}} \def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}} \def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}} \def\titlem{\itshape} \newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{bibl}{}{} \newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi } \newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par } \newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par} \newenvironment{rubric}{}{} \newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par } \newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}} \newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}} \newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}} \definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75} \def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}} \DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@} \def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}} \begingroup \catcode`\_=\active \gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}} \endgroup \mathcode`\_=\string"8000 \catcode`\_=12\relax \usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry} \usepackage{framed} \definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95} \usepackage{longtable} \usepackage[normalem]{ulem} \usepackage{fancyvrb} \usepackage{fancyhdr} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{marginnote} \renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1} \renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize} \def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif} \pagestyle{fancy} \usepackage[pdftitle={Linezolid and Methicillin-Resistant Coagulase Negative Staphylococci from Anterior Nares of Nigerian Tertiary School Students}, pdfauthor={}]{hyperref} \hyperbaseurl{} \paperwidth210mm \paperheight297mm \def\@pnumwidth{1.55em} \def\@tocrmarg {2.55em} \def\@dotsep{4.5} \setcounter{tocdepth}{3} \clubpenalty=8000 \emergencystretch 3em \hbadness=4000 \hyphenpenalty=400 \pretolerance=750 \tolerance=2000 \vbadness=4000 \widowpenalty=10000 \renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}% {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}} \renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}% {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\Large}} \renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}% {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\large}} \renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}% {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}% {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}% {\reset@font\normalsize}} \renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}% {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}% {-1em}% {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}} \def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt} \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par \endgroup} \def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}} \def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}} \def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}} \def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}} \@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{} \@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{} \newif\if@mainmatter \@mainmattertrue \def\chaptername{Chapter} \def\frontmatter{% \pagenumbering{roman} \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section} \def\theHsection{\roman{section}} \def\@chapapp{}% } \def\mainmatter{% \cleardoublepage \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter} \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \pagenumbering{arabic} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6} \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}% \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}} \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section} \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}} } \def\backmatter{% \cleardoublepage \setcounter{chapter}{0} \setcounter{section}{0} \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2} \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}% \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter} \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}} \appendix } \newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{% \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}% {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}% \leftmargin\labelwidth \advance\leftmargin\labelsep \@openbib@code \usecounter{enumiv}% \let\p@enumiv\@empty \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}% }% \sloppy \clubpenalty4000 \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty \widowpenalty4000% \sfcode`\.\@m}% {\def\@noitemerr {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}% \endlist} \def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}} \parskip0pt \parindent1em \def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}} \newenvironment{reflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{sansreflist}{% \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{} {% \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}% \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}% \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}% \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}% \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}% \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}% } {\end{list}\end{raggedright}} \newenvironment{specHead}[2]% {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}% \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}% \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}% \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}% }{} \def\TheFullDate{2016-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2016)} \def\TheID{\makeatother } \def\TheDate{2016-01-15} \title{Linezolid and Methicillin-Resistant Coagulase Negative Staphylococci from Anterior Nares of Nigerian Tertiary School Students} \author{}\makeatletter \makeatletter \newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{% \clearpage \if@twoside \ifodd\c@page \hbox{}\newpage \if@twocolumn \hbox{}\newpage \fi \fi \fi } \makeatother \makeatletter \thispagestyle{empty} \markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author} \renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@ \belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip \abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@ \belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@ \def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@ \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@ \itemsep 1pt} } \makeatother \fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm} \fancyhf{} \setlength{\headheight}{14pt} \fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} \fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} \fancyfoot[RO]{} \fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID} \fancyfoot[LE]{} \fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage} \fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID} \hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true} \fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}} \date{} \usepackage{authblk} \providecommand{\keywords}[1] { \footnotesize \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1 } \usepackage{graphicx,xcolor} \definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81} \definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9} \definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70} \definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} \renewenvironment{abstract}{% \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space} }{% \vskip8pt \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}} \vskip16pt } \usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos} \makeatother \usepackage{lineno} \linenumbers \begin{document} \author[1]{Abdu Abdulrasheed} \author[2]{Kemebradikumo Pondei} \author[3]{Lamikanra Adebayo} \affil[1]{ Niger Delta University, Wilberforce Island, Bayelsa State} \renewcommand\Authands{ and } \date{\small \em Received: 10 December 2015 Accepted: 5 January 2016 Published: 15 January 2016} \maketitle \begin{abstract} Background: The carriage of Coagulase Negative Staphylococci in the anterior nares of subjects in the study environment has not been investigated before and this study is thus a reference study against which future studies can be compared. The isolates obtained were also tested against frequently used antibiotics as well as linezolid, an antibiotic which is of considerable importance in the treatment of Multidrug resistant staphylococci.Methods: A total of 400 nasal swabs were collected from anterior nares of apparently healthy subjects aseptically using a sterile swab sticks. The antibiotic susceptibilities of isolates of S. aureus obtained against eight different antibiotics including Linezolid were determined using the disc-plate method. \end{abstract} \keywords{coagulase-negative staphylococci; antibiotic susceptibility patterns; methicillin-resistant CoNS, linezolid-resistant CoNS, anterior nares, apparently} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark} \end{textblock*} \begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) \textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}} \end{textblock*} \let\tabcellsep& \section[{I. Introduction}]{I. Introduction}\par oagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) are part of normal commensals of the skin, anterior nares, and ear canals of humans \hyperref[b0]{[1]}. Because of their relatively low virulence, they have long been considered as nonpathogenetic, and were rarely reported to cause severe infections. However, as a result of the combination of increased use of intravascular devices and an increase in the number of hospitalised immunocompromised patients, CoNS have emerged and are increasingly recognised as a major agents of clinically significant infection of the bloodstream and other sites \hyperref[b1]{[2,}\hyperref[b2]{3,}\hyperref[b3]{4,}\hyperref[b4]{5,}\hyperref[b5]{6,}\hyperref[b6]{7,}\hyperref[b7]{8]}.\par Given the frequency with which multiple antimicrobial resistance is encountered, treatment of CoNS infections can be challenging and oxazolidinone: Line zolid has been considered the drug of choice for the management of infections caused by gram-positive organisms, including resistant organisms, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, methicillinresistant coagulase-negative staphylococci (MRCoNS), vancomycin-resistant enterococci, and multidrugresistant Streptococcus pneumonia \hyperref[b8]{[9,}\hyperref[b9]{10,}\hyperref[b10]{11,}\hyperref[b11]{12,}\hyperref[b12]{13,}\hyperref[b13]{14,}\hyperref[b14]{15]}. However, widespread use of linezolid recently has led to the emergence of CoNS isolates with decreased susceptibility to these agents further limiting therapeutic options for treatment of infections caused by these organisms \hyperref[b15]{[16,}\hyperref[b16]{17,}\hyperref[b17]{18]}.\par In Nigeria, to date, Linezolid-Resistant Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus (LRCoNS) have not been reported, although there are no indications of the use of linezolid within the study area, it is recognized as one of the few drugs that have been reported to be effective in the treatment of infections caused by MRCoNS. In the current study, we determined nasal carriage rate of CoNS and antimicrobial resistance profile of these coagulase-negative staphylococci isolates with linezolid resistance that were recovered from apparently healthy undergraduate students in Niger Delta University. This study will however serve as a reference point data for nasal carriage rate and Linezolid antimicrobial profile of CoNS for the region. \section[{II. Materials and Methods}]{II. Materials and Methods} \section[{a) Sampling Area}]{a) Sampling Area}\par The study was carried out in Amassoma, a semi urban settlement in the Niger Delta and is home to the Niger Delta University with a student population of about 20,000. It is located on Latitude 4? 59' 09'' N and longitude 6? 06' 34'' E. Its land area is 2,682Km2 (1,036 sq miles) at an elevation/altitude of 9 metres. It is in an area of high humidity (mean: 300C) and temperature (average: 26.7? C with annual rainfall of about 1777mm.\par The students sampled in this study were medical and nursing students of the university. They are of age: (range: 15-39, mean = 22), Sex: (Males: 124; Females: 276) and have stayed a period of 1 year minimum in the University \section[{b) Sampling}]{b) Sampling}\par Anterior nares swabs were collected in accord to protocols described by Rongpharpi et al \hyperref[b18]{[19]}. A total of 400 nasal swabs were collected from anterior nares of apparently healthy subjects aseptically using a sterile swab sticks (Copan Diagnostics, Corona, CA, USA). Swabs were transported in Amies (Oxoid, England) transport medium to the Medical microbiology laboratory of the College of Health Sciences, Niger Delta University for bacteriological assay. \section[{c) Isolation and Identification}]{c) Isolation and Identification}\par In the laboratory, each swab was immediately inoculated onto Mannitol Salt Agar (MSA; Oxoid, England) plates and incubated at 37C for 24 h. The characteristic isolates were aseptically isolated and characterized using established microbiological methods that include colonial morphology, Gram stain characteristics, haemolysin production catalase, coagulase tests as well as DNase production \hyperref[b19]{[20]}. The various isolates were identified to species level by employing standard microbiological methods \hyperref[b19]{[20,}\hyperref[b20]{21]}. Coagulase negative-Staphylococci isolates were confirmed through the use of the Staph identification 25 E (BioMeriux, France). \section[{d) Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing}]{d) Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing}\par The antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of all the isolates to Augmentin (30?g), Cefoxitin (30?g), Ciprofloxacin (5?g), Co-trimoxazole (25?g), Erythromycin (15?g), Gentamycin (30?g), Linezolid (30?g), and Tetracycline (30?g) all obtained from Oxoid (England) were determined using modified single disc diffusion technique in accordance to the guidelines of Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI, 2012) \hyperref[b21]{[22]}. Briefly, standardized overnight culture of each isolate (containing approximately 106 cfu/ml) which was equivalent to 0.5 McFarland Standard was used to swab the surface of Mueller Hinton agar plates and excess drained off and dried while the Petri dish lid was in place. The standard antimicrobial discs were aseptically placed at reasonable equidistance on the inoculated plates and allowed to stand for I hr. The plates (prepared in duplicates) were then incubated at 37 0 C for 18-24 h. The diameter of the zone of inhibition produced by each antimicrobial disc was measured with a ruler in millimeters. Breakpoints and interpretative for susceptibility/resistance was based on the CSLI criteria \hyperref[b21]{[22]}. We used the agar dilution method to further confirm the Linezolid MIC's (lowest concentration at which growth was inhibited) values of the linezolidnonsusceptible CoNS isolates. The MIC (?g/mL) interpretative standard for linezolid were those suggested by CLSI \hyperref[b21]{[22]}, (respectively: ? 4 susceptible, ? 8 resistant). The procedure was performed in duplicate on separate occasions, and the means of the duplicates were used. Staphylococcus aureus NCTC6571 was used as the quality control in each set of tests. \section[{e) Statistical analysis}]{e) Statistical analysis}\par SPSS for Windows (version 20.0; SPSS) software was used for the analysis. Frequency distribution, mean, harmonic mean, standard deviation, analysis of variance (ANOVA) were determined. Categorical variables were compared by using Pearson's chi-squared test (?2) or Fisher's exact probability tests. P-values were calculated and P ?0.05 was considered statistically significant \section[{III. Results}]{III. Results}\par As depicted in Table \hyperref[tab_1]{1}, 227(56.8\%) of the 400 studied subjects yielded Staphylococci growths. The overall carriage rates of Coagulase Negative Staphylococci was 136(34.03\%).\par As shown in Figure {\ref 1}, we identified and confirmed that the 136 CoNS strains belong to 7 species including S. epidermidis 50(36.76\%) which is the most prevalent. This is followed by S. haemolyticus 41(30.15\%), S. saprophyticus 13(9.56\%), S. hominis 10(7.35\%), S. cohnii 8(5.88\%), while Staphylococcus lugdunensis and S. xylosus were 7(5.15\%) each.\par Figure {\ref 2}, shows the antimicrobial susceptibility profile of the isolates. Overall 112(82.4\%) of the 136 CoNS isolates showed resistance to Erythromycin, while resistance were 108 {\ref (79.4)} The prevalence of multiple antibiotic resistance (MAR) of the isolates was investigated. One hundred and twelve (82.35\%) of the isolates showed multiple resistance in varying degrees. Twenty-three (20.54\%), 18 (16.07\%), 26(23.21\%), 22(19.64\%), and 10 (8.93\%) were resistant to 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 antibiotics among the isolated strains respectively. Thirteen (11.61\%) of the isolates were resistant to all the 8 antibiotics tested (Figure {\ref 3}). \section[{IV. Discussion}]{IV. Discussion}\par We conducted this study in order to determine the nasal carriage rate and antimicrobial resistance profile of CoNS strains isolated from the anterior nares of apparently healthy students of a tertiary institution in Wilberforce Island, Amassoma. The institution is situated in a semi urban area in Bayelsa-state in the Niger Delta. The result obtained from the present study will serve as a reference data for CoNS carriage rate. In addition, the study also gives an understanding into the patterns of antimicrobial resistance profile of these isolates in the locality.\par The study revealed that 136 out of the 400 subjects examined were positive for CoNS in their anterior nares, indicating the nasal carriage rate of 34.03\%. Earlier, report indicates the nasal carriage rate of CoNS to vary from 13\% to 56\% in different populations \hyperref[b12]{[13,}\hyperref[b22]{23,}\hyperref[b23]{24,}\hyperref[b24]{25]}. Though we observed lower figure in the present study, our findings is in comparison with the carriage rates documented by Morgenstern et al. \hyperref[b25]{[26]} and Lebeaux et al. \hyperref[b26]{[27]} in Portugal and France respectively. Contrast with our findings, higher nasal carriage rates have however been reported by Koziol-Montewka et al., 2006 in Poland (55.8\%) \hyperref[b27]{[28]}, \hyperref[b28]{Campeotto et al. 2004} in Brazil (66.1\%) \hyperref[b28]{[29]}, Akhtar 2010 inPakistan (73.3\%) \hyperref[b29]{[30]} and \hyperref[b30]{Abadi et al. 2015} in Iran (77.7\%) \hyperref[b30]{[31]}. Shibabaw et al. \hyperref[b31]{[32]} attributed these differences to various microbiological methods (sampling techniques to culture media) employed, the local infection control standards and the local prevalence rate. Aside from these, it has been suggested that carrier rates might also be influenced by poor personal hygiene, poor environmental sanitation \hyperref[b31]{[32]} and age-related dynamics of the study participants \hyperref[b0]{[1]}. The low recovery rate of CoNS observed in the present study might be due to the fact that our subjects being medical and nursing students may have been involved in good hygiene practices with hand washing inclusive. On the other hand, as documented by Onasoga, et al., 2015 \hyperref[b32]{[33]}, they may have also been involved in self-medication or predisposed to the misuse of antibiotics.\par The results showed that seven species of CoNS were identified. The most common species isolated was S. epidermidis 50(36.76\%). The similar results were recorded in many studies \hyperref[b33]{[34]}. Various studies have indicated most CoNS isolates obtained in the present study as responsible for infections that are of endogenous origin particularly among immunocompromised and individuals that are hospitalized \hyperref[b34]{[35,}\hyperref[b35]{36,}\hyperref[b36]{37,}\hyperref[b37]{38,} {\ref 39,}\hyperref[b38]{40]}.\par Over the years, studies have shown that antimicrobial therapy causes marked symptom improvement and shortens the duration of illness associated with Staphylococci infections. Before now, various types of antimicrobial agents have been efficacious in the management of Staphylococci infections, but options for treatment of these diseases are becoming restricted due to the appearance of multidrug-resistant strains of CoNS. There has been global concern about the emergence of antimicrobial resistance in common pathogens of community as well as nosocomial infections and CoNS have demonstrated a pattern of progressively increasing resistance to antibiotics worldwide \hyperref[b39]{[41,}\hyperref[b40]{42,}\hyperref[b41]{43,}\hyperref[b42]{44,}\hyperref[b43]{45,}\hyperref[b44]{46,}\hyperref[b45]{47,}\hyperref[b46]{48]}. The results obtained from the present study indicates that 112(82.35\%) of the 136 isolates from this environment are multiply resistant to antibiotics, (Figure {\ref 3}). In comparison, the pattern of multidrug resistance demonstrated here has been described among CoNS isolates in different part of the world which includes Switzerland \hyperref[b25]{[26]}, India \hyperref[b47]{[49]}, Iran \hyperref[b30]{[31,}\hyperref[b33]{34]}, China \hyperref[b42]{[44]} , USA \hyperref[b48]{[50]} ,France \hyperref[b26]{[27]}, Pakistan \hyperref[b29]{[30]}, Italy \hyperref[b49]{[51]} and Poland \hyperref[b27]{[28]}.\par The antibiotic susceptibility pattern of the isolates shows that Gentamycin was the most effective among the CoNS, followed by augmentin, in that order (Figure {\ref 2}). When compared with existing report, the 22.8\% resistance of the CoNS isolates to Gentamycin in this finding corroborates the report of Ma et al. \hyperref[b46]{[48]} and is different with report of Al-Muhanna et al. \hyperref[b33]{[34]} that 32\% of CoNS isolates were resistant to Gentamycin, while Roopa and Biradar \hyperref[b47]{[49]} and Zhanel et al. \hyperref[b50]{[52]} reported 0.0\% and 78.8\% resistance of these pathogens to Gentamycin respectively. So gentamycin is the only drug in this study that is proven to be effective for CoNS. One of the reason for this high susceptibility seen in this study may be that gentamycin appears to be infrequently used as it administered by injection, a dosage form which is far less amenable to selfmedication than orally administered antibiotics in this locality \hyperref[b52]{[53]}.\par On the other hand, the high susceptibility to augmentin observed in this study is in sharp contrast to existing reports (31.6\% versus 70\%; P < 0.0001) by Abdalla et al. \hyperref[b53]{[54]} and Akinkunmi and Lamikanra \hyperref[b54]{[55]} that 70\% and 62.4\% resistance of CoNS to augumentin respectively. Nonetheless, the present findings corroborates the report of Roopa and Biradar \hyperref[b47]{[49]}. One of the reason that could be adduced to low resistance observed in this study may be that augumentin, though an orally administered antibiotics, seems to be rarely abused by individuals in the locality because of its exorbitant price (about 10USD) for a packet in a locality where people live below 1USD per day.\par The antimicrobial resistance profile of CoNS isolated in this study indicated that 58.8\% of the isolates were resistant to Cefoxitin [MR-CoNS]. This result is higher than earlier report \hyperref[b47]{[49,}\hyperref[b54]{55]}, and, lower than report made by Al-Muhanna et al., \hyperref[b33]{[34]}, Maet al. \hyperref[b46]{[48]} and Koksal et al \hyperref[b55]{[56]}. However, it is similar to the report made by Lebeaux et al. \hyperref[b26]{[27]} among the organisms isolated in their respective studies. Reports have documented that resistance to Cefoxitin by disc diffusion can be used for the detection of MRSA strains in routine testing \hyperref[b56]{[57]} because Cefoxitin is regarded as a potential inducer of the system that regulates mecA gene \hyperref[b57]{[58]}. For this reason, the resistant of our isolates which were found to be resistant to Cefoxitin are considered resistant to methicillin (58.8\% MR-CoNS).\par During the susceptibility test in the present study, one of our limitations was excluding Vancomycin, the drug considered efficacious for MRSA and MRCoNS, from the test because of unavailability of its commercial disc. Nonetheless, Delorme et al. \hyperref[b58]{[59]} reported the exclusion of vancomycin from their study because vancomycin may produce erratic results in disc diffusion susceptibility test \hyperref[b58]{[59]}. However, even with the absence of vancomycin susceptibility test, the result of this study can be compared with the findings of several outcomes including \hyperref[b59]{[60,}\hyperref[b60]{61,}\hyperref[b61]{62,}\hyperref[b62]{63]} which established that linezolid is a drug that is as effective as vancomycin. Both antibiotics do not just have similar failure and success rates but adverse effects as well \hyperref[b60]{[61,}\hyperref[b63]{64]}.\par Approximately, 69.1\% of the CoNS isolates showed high resistance to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole in this study. This is similar to what has been reported by Koksal et al. \hyperref[b55]{[56]} and Akinkunmi and Lamikanra \hyperref[b54]{[55]} in Turkey and Ile-Ife, Nigeria respectively and many other researchers, a finding correlated to that by Ma et al \hyperref[b46]{[48]} and Abadi et al. \hyperref[b30]{[31]}. This could be due to the fact that this drug is very commonly available in our setting and is also indiscriminately used for prophylaxis by individuals with symptoms of Upper Respiratory Tract infections (URTI) and Urinary Tract Infections (UTI). The study by Paul et al. \hyperref[b64]{[65]} showed zero resistance to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole to Staphylococcus aureus in Nigeria in 1985, while Gu et al. \hyperref[b9]{[10]} showed 29.4\% trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole in Greece. This is worthy of mention and comparison. It shows that trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole resistance has increased prodigiously over the prevailing years.\par The majority of our CoNS isolates were highly resistant to erythromycin (82.4\%), and the high rate (79.4\%) of resistant to tetracycline and Ciprofloxacin (55.1\%), found in this study is worrisome considering the ability of these organisms to spread easily by direct or indirect person-to-person contact with resultant therapeutic complications and considering that ciprofloxacin has been identified as the drug being the most efficaciousanti-infective drug in Nigeria \hyperref[b41]{[43,}\hyperref[b65]{66]}.\par Combating the increase in mortality and morbidity due to therapeutic failures in the treatment of multidrug resistant Staphylococci infections, particularly those that are methicillin and vancomycin resistances, gave rise to the need for newer efficacious therapeutic options leads to the discovery and approval of oxazolidinone antibiotic: linezolid by FDA in 2000 as an attractive alternative to vancomycin and MRSA \hyperref[b59]{[60,}\hyperref[b66]{67]}. It is tragic that barely one year of its introduction into treatment regime for multidrug resistant Gram-positive organisms, the first resistant among Enterococcus faecium, was reported \hyperref[b67]{[68]} and Tsiodras et al. \hyperref[b68]{[69]} reported the first Linezolid resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a US patient. Since then, linezolid-resistant S. aureus and CoNS have been detected in separate cases and outbreaks worldwide \hyperref[b9]{[10,}\hyperref[b69]{70,}\hyperref[b70]{71]}.\par Currently, 48.5\% of CoNS isolated from the present study were found to be linezolid resistant. Making this finding one of the highest resistance rate recovered among CoNS isolates in Nigeria and amongst those recorded globally. This study revealed that S. epidermidis, S. haemolyticus, S. cohnii, S. saprophyticus, S. hominisisolates, were resistant to linezolid in 52\%, 50\%, 48.78\%, 46.15\%, and 40\% respectively, while S. lugdunensisand S. xylosus showed 42.86\% resistance to linezolid each (Table \hyperref[tab_2]{2}). To confirm this resistivity, we decided to carryout Minimum Inhibitory Concentration tests on these isolates as suggested by CLSI 2012 \hyperref[b21]{[22]}, and the outcome showed that all our linezolid resistant isolates had MICs >256µg/mL.\par Previous studies have shown various resistance profiles of CoNS to linezolid. For example, Morgenstern et al. \hyperref[b25]{[26]} in Switzerland and \hyperref[b42]{[44]} in China reported 0\% resistance to linezolid respectively. However, globally, surveillance studies report <1\% of CoNSas linezolid resistant. But, a study conducted by Potoski et al. \hyperref[b71]{[72]} in the USA, observed Linezolid resistance in about 4.0\% of MRCoNS isolates. Another study conducted in USA by Helio and colleagues reported LRCoNS in 0.1\% \hyperref[b48]{[50]}. Similarly, incidence of 0\% was reported by Al-Muhanna et al. \hyperref[b33]{[34]} from Iraq. Ugwuet al. \hyperref[b65]{[66]} reported 0\% LRCoNS in Southern Nigeria. The high incidence of linezolid resistance in the organisms isolated in this study is not expected since this antibiotic is not broadly used within the study environment, this is worrisome and is worthy of note. Particularly that linezolid is not routinely prescribed and administered in our locality. More so that the drug is very difficult, if available in our market, in other words, its availability for misuse or selfadministration as reported among other antibiotics is not anticipated \hyperref[b72]{[73]}. So, this high resistance recorded must be of concern to practitioners and public health, more so, that these organisms live in association with other organisms in their ecological niche and can disseminate these resistances to other organisms within the environment \hyperref[b72]{[73]}.This collaborates reports made by Garcia et al. \hyperref[b73]{[74]} that horizontal transmission of linezolid resistance could pose a serious threat, because the cfrgene can also be transmitted between species, such as from S. epidermidis, which although not pathogenic, could become a reservoir for resistance genes and that this mode of transmission becomes more difficult to prevent and stop than those of nosocomial spread that are usually controlled with standard measures, such as isolation, barrier precautions, and antibiotic restriction On the other hand, these organisms and their antimicrobial resistancehave been documented to be associated with opportunistic infections and can be transferred from these individuals to the patients, hospital environments and the community \hyperref[b39]{[41,}\hyperref[b74]{75,}\hyperref[b75]{76]} making it a life-threatening organism which may lead to increase mortality and morbidity, particularly among colonised individuals, immunocompromised and HIV patients.Staphylococcal resistance to linezolid (LZD) is said to be mediated through ribosomal mutations (23S rRNA or ribosomal proteins L3 and L4) or through methylation of 23S rRNA by the horizontally transferred chloramphenicol-florfenicol resistance (Cfr)plasmidborne ribosomal methyltransferase that catalyzes methylation of A2503 in the 23S rRNA gene of the large 50S ribosomal subunit, conferring resistance to chloramphenicol, florfenicol, and clindamycin \hyperref[b8]{[9,}\hyperref[b76]{77,}\hyperref[b77]{78,}\hyperref[b78]{79,}\hyperref[b79]{80,}\hyperref[b80]{81,}\hyperref[b81]{82]}. The first cfr-mediated, linezolid-resistant clinical isolate of MRSA was reported in 2007 by Tohet al. {\ref [83]}. More recently, linezolid resistance has been identified due to acquisition of a natural resistance gene, cfr, so the high resistance of the present study CoNS isolates to linezolid might be due to acquisition of resistance to chloramphenicol, as chloramphenicol is one of the antibiotics that are readily available and most abuse, misuse and self-medicated in our locality. However, this assumption would be further investigated. \section[{V. Conclusion}]{V. Conclusion}\par The study findings indicate the usefulness of investigation of CoNS colonisation of the nasal mucosa the primary ecological niche for these microorganisms in order to better understand the epidemiology of this phenomenon, but also to develop prevention measures and treatment strategies in case of established infections among predisposed individuals. \section[{VI. Acknowledgements}]{VI. Acknowledgements}\par We are grateful to Ogobiri Gloria Tamaraemomoemi, Tiemo, and Pereyan Cynthia for Collection of the samples and the school students for participating in this study. \section[{Volume XVI Issue III Version I}]{Volume XVI Issue III Version I}\begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png} \caption{\label{fig_2}}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{23}\includegraphics[]{image-3.png} \caption{\label{fig_3}Figure 2 :Figure 3 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{1} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.3754601226993865\textwidth}P{0.06779141104294478\textwidth}P{0.07822085889570551\textwidth}P{0.3285276073619632\textwidth}} \multicolumn{4}{l}{Staphylococci colonising anterior nares}\\ Age\tabcellsep Male\tabcellsep Female\tabcellsep No (\%) Isolate\\ 15-19\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 6\tabcellsep 10(7.35)\\ 20-24\tabcellsep 30\tabcellsep 49\tabcellsep 79(58.09)\\ 25-29\tabcellsep 24\tabcellsep 13\tabcellsep 37(27.21)\\ 30-34\tabcellsep 4\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 7(5.15)\\ 35-39\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 3(2.21)\\ Total\tabcellsep 65\tabcellsep 71\tabcellsep 136(100)\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: 41Volume XVI Issue III Version I]} \caption{\label{tab_1}Table 1 :}\end{figure} \begin{figure}[htbp] \noindent\textbf{2} \par \begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}} S. xylosus\\ (n=7)\end{longtable} \par {\small\itshape [Note: KEY: AMC: Augmentin (30?g), CEF: Cefoxitin (30?g), CIP: Ciprofloxacin (5?g), COT: Co-trimoxazole (25?g), E: Erythromycin (15? g), CN: Gentamycin (30?g), LZD: Linezolid (30?g), and TE: Tetracycline (30?g)Figure 1: © 2 016 Global Journals Inc. (US)]} \caption{\label{tab_2}Table 2 :}\end{figure} \footnote{Linezolid and Methicillin-Resistant Coagulase Negative Staphylococci from Anterior Nares of Nigerian Tertiary School Students} \backmatter \begin{bibitemlist}{1} \bibitem[Cohnii]{b83}\label{b83} \textit{}, S Cohnii . 5 p. 88. \bibitem[Saprophyticus]{b86}\label{b86} \textit{}, S Saprophyticus . \bibitem[Casey et al. ()]{b6}\label{b6} \textit{}, A L Casey , P A Lambert , Elliott Tsj Staphylococci . \textit{Int J Antimicrob Agents} 2007. 29 p. . (Suppl. 3) \bibitem[ J. Antimicrob. Chemother ()]{b51}\label{b51} \textit{}, \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkt022}{10.1093/jac/dkt022}. \url{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkt022} \textit{J. Antimicrob. Chemother} 2013. (68) p. . (Suppl) \bibitem[Hominis (n=10)]{b87}\label{b87} \textit{}, S Hominis . n=10. \bibitem[Haemolyticus (n=41)]{b85}\label{b85} \textit{}, S Haemolyticus . n=41. \bibitem[Lugdunensis (n=7)]{b89}\label{b89} \textit{}, S Lugdunensis . n=7. \bibitem[Cohnii (n=8)]{b88}\label{b88} \textit{}, S Cohnii . n=8. \bibitem[(CLSI) performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Twenty-fourth Information Supplement ()]{b56}\label{b56} \textit{(CLSI) performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Twenty-fourth Information Supplement}, 2014. 34 p. . Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute \bibitem[Kehrenberg et al. ()]{b81}\label{b81} ‘A new mechanism for chloramphenicol, florfenicol and clindamycin resistance: methylation of 23S ribosomal RNA at A2503’. C Kehrenberg , S Schwarz , L Jacobsen , L H Hansen , B Vester . \textit{Mol. Microbiol} 2005. 57 (4) p. . \bibitem[Campeotto et al. ()]{b28}\label{b28} ‘A routine prospective survey process to detect nosocomial bacterial colonization in a neonatal unit: risk factors for acquisition’. F Campeotto , F Garnier , N Kalach , P Soulaines , C Dupont , J Raymond . \textit{Arch Pediatr} 2004. 11 (11) p. . \bibitem[Toh et al. ()]{b82}\label{b82} ‘Acquisition of a natural resistance gene renders a clinical strain of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus resistant to the synthetic antibiotic linezolid’. S M Toh , L Xiong , C A Arias , M V Villegas , K Lolans , J Quinn , A S Mankin . \textit{Mol Microbiol} 2007. 64 p. . \bibitem[Emory and Gaynes ()]{b7}\label{b7} ‘An overview of nosocomial infections, including the role of the microbiology laboratory’. T G Emory , R P Gaynes . \textit{Clin Microbiol Rev} 1993. 6 p. . \bibitem[Shittu et al. ()]{b45}\label{b45} ‘Antibiotic resistance and molecular epidemiology of Staphylococcus aureus in Nigeria’. A O Shittu , K Okon , S Adesida , O Oyedara , W Witte , B Strommenger . \url{http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2180/11/92} \textit{BMC Microbiol} 2011. 11 p. 92. \bibitem[Morgenstern et al. ()]{b25}\label{b25} ‘Antibiotic Resistance of Commensal Staphylococcus aureus and Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci in an International Cohort of Surgeons: A Prospective Point-Prevalence Study’. M Morgenstern , C Erichsen , S Hackl , J Mily , M Militz , J Friederichs . \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0148437}{10.1371/journal.pone.0148437}. \textit{PLoS ONE} 2016. 11 (2) p. e0148437. \bibitem[Wei et al. ()]{b42}\label{b42} ‘Antibiotic resistance pattern of methicillinresistance and coagulase-negative Staphylococcus isolates among hospitalized patients at a tertiary hospital in Gansu, North-western China’. L Wei , R Wu , F Zou , G Liu , L Wu , Q Wei , J Li , L Lei , H Duo . \textit{Afr. J. Microbiol. Res} 2014. 8 (1) p. . \bibitem[Koksal et al. ()]{b55}\label{b55} ‘Antibiotic resistance patterns of coagulase-negative staphylococcus strains isolated from blood cultures of septicemic patients in Turkey’. F Koksal , H Yasar , M Samasti . \textit{Microbiol Res} 2009. 164 p. . \bibitem[Juayang et al. ()]{b59}\label{b59} ‘Antibiotic resistance profiling of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from clinical specimens in a tertiary hospital from 2010 to 2012’. A C Juayang , G B De Los Reyes , Ajg De La Rama , C T Gallega . \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/898457}{10.1155/2014/898457}. \url{http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/898457} \textit{Interdiscip Perspect Infect Dis} 2014. 2014 p. . \bibitem[Ma et al. ()]{b46}\label{b46} ‘Antibiotic susceptibility of coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS): emergence of teicoplaninnon-susceptible CoNS strains with inducible resistance to vancomycin’. X X Ma , E H Wang , Y Liu , E J Luo . \textit{J Med Microbiol} 2011. 60 p. . \bibitem[Antibiotics No (%) CoNS of isolates resistant to antibiotics Total S. epidermidis (n=50)]{b84}\label{b84} \textit{Antibiotics No (\%) CoNS of isolates resistant to antibiotics Total S. epidermidis (n=50)}, \bibitem[Abdalla et al. ()]{b53}\label{b53} ‘Antibiotics Sensitivity Profile Towards Staphylococcus hominis in Assir Region of Saudi Arabia’. N M Abdalla , W O Haimour , A A Osman , M A Sarhan , H A Musaa . \textit{J. Sci. Res} 2013. 5 (1) p. . \bibitem[Helio et al. ()]{b48}\label{b48} ‘Antimicrobial Activity of Ceftaroline Tested against Staphylococci with Reduced Susceptibility to Linezolid, Daptomycin, or Vancomycin from U.S. Hospitals’. S Helio , Robert K Sader , Ronald N Flamm , Jones . \textit{Antimicrob Agents and Chemother} 2008 to 2011. 2013. 57 (7) p. . \bibitem[Chua et al. ()]{b75}\label{b75} ‘Antimicrobial resistance: Not community-associated methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus (CAMRSA)! A clinician's guide to community MRSA-its evolving antimicrobial resistance and implications for therapy’. K Chua , F Laurent , G Coombs , M L Gracyson , B P Howden . \textit{Clin Infect Dis} 2011. 52 p. . \bibitem[Paul et al. ()]{b64}\label{b64} ‘Antimicrobial sensitivity patterns of hospital and non-hospital strains of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from nasal carriers’. M O Paul , D A Aderibigbe , C Z Sule , A Lamikanra . \textit{J Hyg (Lond)} 1982. 89 p. . \bibitem[Zhanel et al.]{b50}\label{b50} \textit{Antimicrobial susceptibility of 22746 pathogens from Canadian hospitals: results of the CANWARD}, G G Zhanel , H J Adam , M R Baxter , J Fuller , K A Nichol , A J Denisuik , P Lagacé-Wiens , A Walkty , J A Karlowsky , F Schweizer , D J Hoban . p. . \bibitem[Shibabaw et al. ()]{b31}\label{b31} ‘Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern of nasal Staphylococcus aureus among dessie referral hospital health care workers, dessie, Northeast Ethiopia’. A Shibabaw , T Abebe , A Mihret . \textit{Int J. Infect Dis} 2014. 25 p. . \bibitem[Mendes et al. ()]{b16}\label{b16} ‘Assessment of linezolid resistance mechanisms among Staphylococcus epidermidis causing bacteraemia in Rome, Italy’. R E Mendes , L M Deshpande , D J Farrell . \textit{J Antimicrob Chemother} 2010. 65 p. . \bibitem[Al-Muhanna et al. ()]{b33}\label{b33} ‘Characterization of coagulase-negative, oxacillin resistant staphylococci from patients undergoing catheter related infections’. A S Al-Muhanna , S A Al-Hilu , M A Alzuhairi . \textit{Eur J Exp Biol} 2014. 4 (3) p. . \bibitem[Ugwu et al. ()]{b65}\label{b65} ‘Characterization of mannitol-fermenting methicillin-resistant staphylococci isolated from pigs in Nigeria’. C C Ugwu , E Gomez-Sanz , I C Agbo , C Torres , Chah Kf . \textit{Brazilian Journal of Microbiology} 2015. 46 (3) p. . \bibitem[Sanchez Garcia et al. ()]{b15}\label{b15} ‘Clinical outbreak of linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in an intensive care unit’. M Sanchez Garcia , De La Torre , M A Morales , G . \textit{JAMA} 2010. 303 p. . \bibitem[Rogers et al. ()]{b5}\label{b5} ‘Coagulase-negative staphylococcal infections’. K L Rogers , P D Fey , M E Rupp . \textit{Infect Dis Clin North Am} 2009. 23 (1) p. . \bibitem[Becker et al. ()]{b36}\label{b36} ‘Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci’. K Becker , C Heilmann , G Peters . \textit{Clin Microbiol Rev} 2014. 27 (4) p. . \bibitem[Widerstrom et al. ()]{b74}\label{b74} ‘Coagulase-negative staphylococci: Update on the molecular epidemiology and clinical presentation, with a focus on Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus saprophyticus’. M Widerstrom , J Wistrom , A Sjostedt . \textit{Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis} 2012. 31 p. . \bibitem[Becker et al. ()]{b0}\label{b0} ‘Coagulasenegative staphylococci’. K Becker , C Heilmann , G Peters . \textit{Clin Microbiol Rev} 2014. 27 p. 870. \bibitem[Bjorkqvist et al. ()]{b23}\label{b23} ‘Colonization pattern of coagulasenegative staphylococci in preterm neonates and the relation to bacteremia’. M Bjorkqvist , M Liljedahl , J Zimmermann , J Schollin , B Soderquist . \textit{Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis} 2010. 29 (9) p. . \bibitem[Heikens et al. ()]{b37}\label{b37} ‘Comparison of genotypic and phenotypic methods for species-level identification of clinical isolates of coagulase-negative staphylococci’. E Heikens , A Fleer , A Paauw , A Florijn , A C Fluit . \textit{J Clin Microbiol} 2005. 43 (5) p. . \bibitem[Madhusudhan et al. ()]{b57}\label{b57} ‘Correlation of cefoxitin disc diffusion test and oxacillin disc diffusion test for detecting mecA mediated oxacillin resistant Staphylococcusaureus’. N S Madhusudhan , S Deepa , D N Shoba . \textit{J. Pharm Biomed Sci} 2011. 10 (2) p. . \bibitem[Cheesbrough ()]{b19}\label{b19} \textit{District laboratory practice in tropical countries Part 2: Edingburgh building}, M Cheesbrough . 2002. UK.: Cambridge University Press. p. . \bibitem[Zong et al. ()]{b1}\label{b1} ‘Diversity of SCCmec elements in methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci clinical isolates’. Z Y Zong , C H Peng , X J Lu . \textit{PLoS One} 2011. 6 p. e20191. \bibitem[Bongiorno et al. ()]{b49}\label{b49} ‘DNA methylase modifications and other linezolid resistance mutations in coagulase-negative staphylococci in Italy’. D Bongiorno , F Campanile , G Mongelli , M T Baldi , R Provenzani , S Reali . \textit{J Antimicrob Chemother} 2010. 65 p. . \bibitem[Bongiorno et al. ()]{b79}\label{b79} ‘DNA methylase modifications and other linezolid resistance mutations in coagulase-negative staphylococci in Italy’. D Bongiorno , F Campanile , G Mongelli . \textit{J Antimicrob Chemother} 2010. 65 p. . \bibitem[Ross et al. ()]{b11}\label{b11} ‘Eight-year (2002-2009) summary of the linezolid (Zyvox(R) Annual Appraisal of Potency and Spectrum; ZAAPS) program in European countries’. J E Ross , D J Farrell , R E Mendes . \textit{J Chemother} 2011. 23 p. . \bibitem[Yang et al. ()]{b77}\label{b77} ‘Emergence of cfr-harbouring coagulasenegative staphylococci among patients receiving linezolid therapy in two hospitals in China’. X J Yang , Y Chen , Q Yang , T T Qu , L L Liu , H P Wang , Y S Yu . \textit{J Med Microbiol} 2013. 62 p. . \bibitem[Endimiani et al. ()]{b44}\label{b44} ‘Emergence of linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus after prolonged treatment of cystic fibrosis patients in cleveland’. A Endimiani , M Blackford , E C Dasenbrook , M D Reed , S Bajaksouszian , A M Hujer . \textit{Antimicrob. Agents Chemother} 2011. p. . \bibitem[Potoski et al. ()]{b71}\label{b71} ‘Epidemiological Profile of Linezolid-Resistant Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci’. B A Potoski , J Adams , L Clarke , K Shutt , P K Linden , C Baxter , A W Pasculle , B Capitano , A Y Peleg , D Szabo , D L Paterson . \textit{Clin Infect Dis} 2006. 43 p. . \bibitem[Delorme et al. ()]{b58}\label{b58} ‘Epidemiology and susceptibilities of methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus in Northeastern Ohio’. T Delorme , S Rose , J Senita , C Callahan , P Nasr . \textit{The Am J Clin Pathol} 2009. 132 (5) p. . \bibitem[Babafemi et al. ()]{b41}\label{b41} ‘Epidemiology of methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus among hospitalized patients and apparently healthy individuals in Ekiti and Ondo States’. E O Babafemi , O M David , A O Oluduro , O Famurewa . \textit{Nigeria. J Pharm Biomed Sci} 2014. 4 (11) p. . \bibitem[Guzmán-Blanco et al. ()]{b62}\label{b62} ‘Epidemiology of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in Latin America’. M Guzmán-Blanco , C Mejía , R Isturiz , C Alvarez , L Bavestrello , E Gotuzzo , J Labarca , Carlos M Luna , E Rodríguez-Noriega , Mjc Salles , J Zurita , C Seas . \textit{Int J Antimicrob Agents} 2009. 34 (4) p. . \bibitem[Lebeaux et al. ()]{b26}\label{b26} ‘Evolution of Nasal Carriage of Methicillin-Resistant Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci in a Remote Population’. D Lebeaux , F Barbier , C Angebault , L Benmahdi , E Ruppé , Benjamin Felix , B . \textit{Antimicrob Agents and Chemother} 2012. 56 (1) p. . \bibitem[Jamaluddin et al. ()]{b24}\label{b24} ‘Extreme genetic diversity of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis strains disseminated among healthy Japanese children’. T Z Jamaluddin , K Kuwahara-Arai , K Hisata , M Terasawa , L Cui , T Baba , C Sotozono , S Kinoshita , T Ito , K Hiramatsu . \textit{J Clin Microbiol} 2008. 46 (11) p. . \bibitem[Anonymous and Linzolid ()]{b67}\label{b67} ‘First of a new drug class for gram positive infections’. Anonymous , Linzolid . DOI: 102165/0004231020011709000001. \textit{DrugsTher Perspect} 2001. 17 (9) p. . \bibitem[Danzmann et al. ()]{b34}\label{b34} ‘Health care workers causing large nosocomial outbreaks: a systematic review’. L Danzmann , P Gastmeier , F Schwab , R P Vonberg . \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-13-98}{10.1186/1471-2334-13-98}. 23432927. PMC3599984. \textit{BMC Infect Dis} 2013. 13 p. 98. \bibitem[Dubois et al. ()]{b2}\label{b2} ‘Identification of a variety of Staphylococcus species by matrix-assisted laser desorption ionizationtime of flight mass spectrometry’. D Dubois , D Leyssene , J P Chacornac , M Kostrzewa , P O Schmit , R Talon , R Bonnet , J Delmas . \textit{J Clin Microbiol} 2010. 48 p. . \bibitem[Roopa and Biradar]{b47}\label{b47} ‘Incidence and Speciation of Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus Isolates from Clinically Relevant Specimens with their Antibiotic Susceptibility Patterns’. C Roopa , S Biradar . \textit{Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci} 2015 (9) p. . \bibitem[O'connor et al. ()]{b69}\label{b69} ‘Incidence, management and outcomes of the first cfr-mediated linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis outbreak in a tertiary referral centre in the republic ofIreland’. C O'connor , J Powell , C Finnegan , A O'gorman , S Barrett , K L Hopkins . \textit{The J Hosp Infect} 2015. 90 (4) p. . \bibitem[Miragaia et al. ()]{b35}\label{b35} ‘Inferring a population structure for Staphylococcus epidermidis from multilocus sequence typing data’. M Miragaia , J C Thomas , I Couto , M C Enright , H De Lencastre . \textit{J Bacteriol} 2007. 189 (6) p. . \bibitem[Yalçin et al. ()]{b76}\label{b76} ‘Investigation of linezolid resistance in Staphylococcus epidermidis: first reported linezolid resistant coagulase negative staphylococcus in Turkey’. B Yalçin , M B Selek , B Bektöre , T Ho?bul , M Özyurt . \textit{Turk J Med Sci} 2014. 44 p. . \bibitem[De Mattos et al. ()]{b38}\label{b38} ‘Isolation of methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci from patients undergoing continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and comparison of different molecular techniques for discriminating isolates of Staphylococcus epidermidis’. E M De Mattos , L A Teixeira , V M Alves , C A Rezenda E Resende , M V Da Silva Coimbra , M C Da Silva-Carvalho , B T Ferreira-Carvalho , A M Figueiredo . \textit{Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis} 2003. 45 (1) p. . \bibitem[Oli et al. ()]{b43}\label{b43} ‘Knowledge and use of disinfection policy in some government hospitals in South-East’. A N Oli , J N Nweke , M C Ugw , L O Anagu , A H Oli , Esimone Co . \textit{Nigeria. Bri J. Med Medical Res} 2013. 3 (4) p. . \bibitem[Farrell et al. ()]{b10}\label{b10} ‘LEADER Program results for 2009: an activity and spectrum analysis of linezolid using 6,414 clinical isolates from 56 medical centers in the United States’. D J Farrell , R E Mendes , J E Ross . \textit{Antimicrob Agents Chemother} 2011. 55 p. . \bibitem[Abdu and Lamikanra ()]{b72}\label{b72} ‘Linezolid and Methicillin Resistances in S. aureus Isolated from the Anterior Nares of Apparently Healthy Undergraduates of the Niger Delta University’. A Abdu , A Lamikanra . \textit{Br Microbiol Res J} 2016. 15 (6) p. . \bibitem[Tsiodras et al. ()]{b68}\label{b68} ‘Linezolid resistance in a clinical isolate of Staphylococcus aureus’. S Tsiodras , H S Gold , G Sakoulas . \textit{Lancet} 2001. 358 p. . \bibitem[Hill et al. ()]{b12}\label{b12} ‘Linezolid-resistant ST36 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus associated with prolonged linezolid treatment in two paediatric cystic fibrosis patients’. R L Hill , A M Kearns , J Nash . \textit{J Antimicrob Chemother} 2010. 65 p. . \bibitem[Sierra et al. ()]{b66}\label{b66} ‘Low prevalence of cfr mediated linezolid resistance among methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a Spanish Hospital: Case report on linezolid resistance acquired during linezolid therapy’. J M Sierra , M Camoez , F Tubau , O Gasch , M Pujol . DOI: 10. 1371/journal.pone.0059215. \textit{PLoS ONE} 2013. 8 (3) p. e59215. \bibitem[Cowan and Steel ()]{b20}\label{b20} ‘Manual for the identification of medical Bacteria’. S T Cowan , K J Steel . \textit{Barrow GI. Feltham RKA} 2004. Cambridge University Press. p. . (3rd edition) \bibitem[Tewhey et al.]{b8}\label{b8} ‘Mechanisms of Linezolid Resistance among Coagulase-Negative Staphylococci Determined by Whole-Genome Sequencing’. R Tewhey , B Gu , T Kelesidis , C Charlton , A Bobenchik , J Hindler , N J Schork . \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/mBio.00894-14}{10.1128/mBio.00894-14}. \textit{mBio} 2014 (3) p. . \bibitem[Abadi et al. ()]{b30}\label{b30} ‘Molecular Characteristics of Nasal Carriage Methicillin-Resistant Coagulase Negative Staphylococci in School Students’. Mim Abadi , R Moniri , A Khorshidi , A Piroozmand , Sga Mousavi , K Dastehgoli , H M Ghazikalaye . \textit{Jundishapur J Microbiol} 2015. 8 (6) p. e18591. \bibitem[Ternes et al. ()]{b22}\label{b22} ‘Molecular epidemiology of coagulasenegative Staphylococcus carriage in neonates admitted to an intensive care unit in Brazil’. Y M Ternes , J Lamaro-Cardoso , Mcp André , Pessoa VpJr , Mas Vieira , R Minamisava , A L Andrade , A Kipnis . \textit{BMC Infectious Diseases} 2013. 13 p. 572. \bibitem[Shorr et al. ()]{b63}\label{b63} ‘Morbidity and cost burden of methicillinresistant Staphylococcus aureus in early onset ventilator-associated pneumonia’. A F Shorr , Y P Tabak , V Gupta , R S Johannes , L Z Liu . \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cc4934):1-7}{10.1186/cc4934):1-7}. \textit{Crit. Care} 2006. 10 p. R97. \bibitem[Hammuel et al. ()]{b39}\label{b39} ‘Occurrence and antibiogram profile of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from some hospital environment in Zaria’. C Hammuel , M O Idoko , H H Migap , N Ambrose . \textit{Nigeria. Afr J Microbiol Res} 2015. 9 (19) p. . \bibitem[Diekema and Jones ()]{b14}\label{b14} ‘Oxazolidinone antibiotics’. D J Diekema , R N Jones . \textit{Lancet} 2001. 358 p. . \bibitem[Onasoga et al. ()]{b32}\label{b32} ‘Pattern and management of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among undergraduates attending university health care centre in Bayelsa State’. O A Onasoga , A Abdu , B N Anabui , V F Hanson . \textit{Nigeria. Int STD Res Rev} 2015. 3 (3) p. . \bibitem[Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Eighteenth Information Supplement ()]{b21}\label{b21} \textit{Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Eighteenth Information Supplement}, 2012. 28 p. . Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI \bibitem[Hammuel et al. ()]{b40}\label{b40} ‘Prevalence and antibiogram pattern of some nosocomial pathogens isolated from hospital environment in Zaria’. C Hammuel , D E Jatau , Cmz Whong . \textit{Nigeria. Aceh Int. J. Sci. Technol} 2014. 3 (3) p. . \bibitem[Onanuga et al. ()]{b52}\label{b52} ‘Prevalence of communityassociated multiresistant Staphylococcus aureus among healthy women in Abuja’. A Onanuga , A R Oyi , B O Olayinkayinka , J A Onaolapo . \textit{Nigeria. Afr. J. Biotech} 2005. 4 p. . \bibitem[Long and Vester ()]{b78}\label{b78} ‘Resistance to linezolid caused by modifications at its binding site on the ribosome’. K S Long , B Vester . \textit{Antimicrob Agents Chemother} 2012. 56 (2) p. . \bibitem[Garcia et al. ()]{b70}\label{b70} ‘Resistance to linezolid is mediated by the cfr gene in the first report of an outbreak of linezolid resistant Staphylococcus aureus’. M Garcia , J Juan , B Elvira . \textit{Clin Infect Dis} 2010. 50 (6) p. . \bibitem[Garcia et al. ()]{b73}\label{b73} ‘Resistance to linezolid is mediated by the cfr gene in the first report of an outbreak of linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus’. M Garcia , J Juan , B Elvira . \textit{Clin Infect Dis} 2010. 50 (6) p. . \bibitem[Cervera et al. ()]{b3}\label{b3} ‘Risk factors and management of Grampositive bacteraemia’. C Cervera , M Almela , J A Martinez-Martinez , A Moreno , J M Miro . \textit{Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents} 2009. 34 p. . (Suppl. 4) \bibitem[Hong et al. ()]{b13}\label{b13} ‘Sequential Linezolid-Resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis Isolates with G2576T Mutation v’. T Hong , X Li , J Wang , C Sloan , C Cicogna . \textit{J Clin Microbiol} 2007. 45 (10) p. . \bibitem[Akinkunmi and Lamikanra ()]{b54}\label{b54} ‘Species Distribution and Antibiotic Resistance in Coagulase-negative Staphylococci Colonizing the Gastrointestinal Tract of Children in Ile-Ife, Nigeria’. E O Akinkunmi , A Lamikanra . \textit{Trop J Pharm Res} 2010. 9 (1) p. . \bibitem[Akhtar ()]{b29}\label{b29} ‘Staphylococcal Nasal Carriage of Health Care Workers’. N Akhtar . \textit{J Coll Physicians Surg Pak} 2010. 20 (7) p. . \bibitem[Otto ()]{b4}\label{b4} ‘Staphylococcus epidermidis -the 'accidental' pathogen’. M Otto . \textit{Nat Rev Microbiol} 2009. 7 p. . \bibitem[Tegnell et al. ()]{b17}\label{b17} ‘Study of developed resistance due to antibiotic treatment of coagulasenegative staphylococci’. A Tegnell , K Grabowska , A Jacobsson , M Andersson , J Giesecke , L Ohman . \textit{Microb Drug Resist} 2003. 9 p. . \bibitem[Khan et al. ()]{b61}\label{b61} ‘The continuing threat of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureuspast, present, future’. Z Khan , S Faisal , S Hasnain . \textit{J Sci Res} 2010. 40 (2) p. . \bibitem[Gu et al. ()]{b9}\label{b9} ‘The emerging problem of linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus’. B Gu , T Kelesidis , S Tsiodras , J Hindler , R M Humphries . \textit{J Antimicrob Chemother} 2013. 68 p. . \bibitem[Koziol-Montewka et al. ()]{b27}\label{b27} ‘The investigation of Staphylococcus aureus and coagulasenegative staphylococci nasal carriage among patients undergoing haemodialysis’. M Koziol-Montewka , A Szczepanik , I Baranowicz , L Jo´z´wiak , A Ksia ? Z?ek , D Kaczor . \textit{Microbiol Res} 2006. 161 p. . \bibitem[Rongpharpi et al. ()]{b18}\label{b18} ‘The prevalence of nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus among healthcare workers at a tertiary care hospital in Assamwith special reference to MRSA’. S R Rongpharpi , N K Hazarika , H Kalita . \textit{J Clin. Diagn Res} 2013. 7 (2) p. . \bibitem[Zhu et al. ()]{b80}\label{b80} ‘Use of pyrosequencing to identify point mutations in domain V of 23S rRNA genes of linezolid-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis’. W Zhu , F C Tenover , J Limor . \textit{Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis} 2007. 26 p. . \bibitem[Pogue and Alaniz ()]{b60}\label{b60} ‘Vancomycin versus linezolid in the treatment of methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia: Implications of theZEPHyR trial’. J M Pogue , C Alaniz . \textit{Ann Pharmacother} 2012. 46 (10) p. . \end{bibitemlist} \end{document}