Article

A population-based comparison of strategies to prevent early-onset group B streptococcal disease in neonates.

Respiratory Diseases Branch, MS-C23, Division of Bacterial and Mycotic Disease, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA 30333, USA.
New England Journal of Medicine (Impact Factor: 54.42). 08/2002; 347(4):233-9. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa020205
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Guidelines issued in 1996 in the United States recommend either screening of pregnant women for group B streptococcal colonization by means of cultures (screening approach) or assessing clinical risk factors (risk-based approach) to identify candidates for intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis.
In a multistate retrospective cohort study, we compared the effectiveness of the screening and risk-based approaches in preventing early-onset group B streptococcal disease (in infants less than seven days old). We studied a stratified random sample of the 629,912 live births in 1998 and 1999 in eight geographical areas where there was active surveillance for group B streptococcal infection, including all births in which the neonate had early-onset disease. Women with no documented culture for group B streptococcus were considered to have been cared for according to the risk-based approach.
We studied 5144 births, including 312 in which the newborn had early-onset group B streptococcal disease. Antenatal screening was documented for 52 percent of the mothers. The risk of early-onset disease was significantly lower among the infants of screened women than among those in the risk-based group (adjusted relative risk, 0.46; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.60). Because women whose providers had no strategy for prophylaxis may have been misclassified in the risk-based group, we excluded all women with risk factors and adequate time for prophylaxis who did not receive antibiotics. The adjusted relative risk of early-onset disease associated with the screening approach in this secondary analysis was similar--0.48 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.37 to 0.63).
Routine screening for group B streptococcus during pregnancy prevents more cases of early-onset disease than the risk-based approach. Recommendations that endorse both strategies as equivalent warrant reconsideration.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
164 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The strict definition of passive immunoprophylaxis includes the administration of exogenously produced antibodies (polyclonal and monoclonal) to prevent infections in exposed individuals, inactivate bacterial toxins or ‘correct’ hypogammaglobulinemia in immunocompromised hosts. This definition can be broadened to include modulators of the immune system. Despite advances in chemotherapy and vaccine development, suitable treatment is not currently available for many pathogens. As a result, passive immunization is an appropriate therapeutic option for many organisms.
    Current Opinion in Pharmacology 01/2003; · 4.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Neonatal infection with Streptococcus agalactiae, or group B Streptococcus (GBS), is a leading cause of sepsis and meningitis in newborns. Recent guidelines have recommended universal screening of all pregnant women to identify those colonized with GBS, and administration of peripartum prophylaxis to those identified as carriers to prevent neonatal infection. Enriched culture methods are the current standard for prenatal GBS screening; however, implementation of more sensitive molecular diagnostics may be able to further reduce the risk of early-onset GBS infection. We report a clinical evaluation of the Xpert GBS LB Assay, a molecular diagnostic test for the identification of GBS from broth-enriched vaginal/rectal specimens obtained during routine prenatal screening. A total of 826 specimens were collected from women undergoing prenatal screening (35-37 weeks gestation) and tested at one of three clinical centers. Each swab specimen was tested directly prior to enrichment using the Xpert GBS assay. Following 18-24 h broth enrichment, each specimen was tested using the Xpert LB Assay as well as the FDA-cleared SMART GBS Assay as a molecular comparator. Results obtained using all three molecular tests were compared to broth enriched culture as "gold standard". Sensitivity and specificity of the Xpert GBS LB Assay was 99.0% and 92.4%, respectively, compared to gold standard culture. The SMART GBS molecular test demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 96.8% and 95.5%, respectively. Sensitivity of both broth-enriched molecular methods was superior to direct testing of specimens using the Xpert GBS Assay, which demonstrated sensitivity and specificity of 85.7% and 96.2%, respectively. Copyright © 2014, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
    Journal of Clinical Microbiology 11/2014; 53(2). · 4.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Group B streptococcus (GBS) can cause significant maternal and neonatal morbidity. Over the past 30 years, reductions in early-onset GBS neonatal sepsis in the United States have been attributable to the guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for antepartum screening and treating this organism during labor. This article highlights the clinical implications, screening, diagnosis, prophylactic interventions, and future therapies for mothers with GBS during the peripartum period. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics of North America 11/2014; · 1.40 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
44 Downloads
Available from
May 16, 2014