Assessment of maternal GBS colonization and early-onset neonatal disease rate for term deliveries: a decade perspective
-
Misgav Rottenstreich
,
Marva Bergman
Abstract
Objective
To assess the maternal group B streptococcal (GBS) colonization rate and neonatal early-onset GBS (EOGBS) disease in term deliveries, a decade apart.
Methods
This was a retrospective computerized study between 2005 and 2016. A universal GBS culture-based approach gradually replaced the GBS risk-oriented screening. A vaginal-rectal culture taken at 35–37 weeks was recorded at admission for delivery.
Results
We identified 149,910 term deliveries during the study period. GBS status was recorded in 53,879 (35.9%) cases. The GBS screening rate constantly increased from 20% in 2005 to 47.5% in 2016. GBS colonization rates significantly decreased, from 50.3% in 2005 to 31.7% in 2016, P<0.001. Overall, EOGBS disease was diagnosed in 37 term neonates (0.25 per 1000 live births.). The rate of EOGBS in neonates decreased dramatically from 0.361 per 1000 deliveries between 2005 and 2009 to 0.19 per 1000 deliveries between 2010 and 2016 (P<0.05). During the latter period, over 35% of the deliveries were screened for GBS. Remarkably, 64.9% of the EOGBS originated in the non-screened population.
Conclusion
The universal screening policy was associated with a significant decrease in neonatal EOGBS and therefore should be adopted. Further national surveillance studies should be performed in order to validate this approach.
Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: None declared.
Employment or leadership: None declared.
Honorarium: None declared.
Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.
References
1. Verani JR, McGee L, Schrag SJ. Prevention of perinatal Group B Streptococcal disease – revised guidelines from CDC, 2010. MMWR Recomm Rep 2010;59:1–36.Search in Google Scholar
2. ACOG Committee Opinion: number 279, December 2002. Prevention of early-onset Group B Streptococcal disease in newborns. Obstet Gynecol 2002;100:1405–12.Search in Google Scholar
3. Jordan HT, Farley MM, Craig A, Mohle-Boetani J, Harrison LH, Petit S, et al. Revisiting the need for vaccine prevention of late-onset neonatal Group B Streptococcal disease: a multistate, population-based analysis. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008;27: 1057–64.10.1097/INF.0b013e318180b3b9Search in Google Scholar
4. Weintraub Z, Regev R, Iancu TC, Ferne M, Rabinowitz BS. Perinatal group B streptococcal infections in Israel. Isr J Med Sci 1983;19:900–2.Search in Google Scholar
5. Eidelman AI, Rudensky B, Ferne M, Weintraub G, Isacshon M. Epidemiology of group B streptococci in an Israeli hospital. Isr J Med Sci 1983;19:903–5.Search in Google Scholar
6. Eidelman AI, Rudensky B, Turgeman D, Nubani N, Schimmel MS, Isacsohn M. Epidemiology of group B streptococci colonization and disease in mothers and infants: update of ongoing 10-year Jerusalem study. Isr J Med Sci 1990;26:71–3.Search in Google Scholar
7. Schimmel MS, Eidelman AI, Rudensky B, Tadmor OP, Isacsohn M, Aboulafia Y, et al. Epidemiology of group B streptococcal colonization and infection in Jerusalem, 1989–1991. Isr J Med Sci 1994;30:349–51.Search in Google Scholar
8. Marchaim D, Hallak M, Gortzak-Uzan L. Risk factors for carriage of group B streptococcus in southern Israel. Isr Med Assoc J 2003;5:646–8.Search in Google Scholar
9. Eisenberg VH, Raveh D, Meislish Y, Rudensky B, Ezra Y, Samueloff A, et al. Prevention of early-onset neonatal group B streptococcal infection: is universal screening by culture universally applicable? Isr Med Assoc J 2006;8:698–702.Search in Google Scholar
10. German L, Solt I, Bornstein J, Ben-Harush S, Ben-Elishai M, Weintraub Z. Is there an increase in the incidence of GBS carrier rates among pregnant women in northern Israel? Harefuah 2006;145:866–9, 944.Search in Google Scholar
11. Dsc MH, Jabour A, Anton M, Hakim M, Kheirallah S. Screening Arab Israeli pregnant women for group B streptococcus by the AmpliVue GBS assay: are the rates higher than the national average? Isr Med Assoc J 2018;5:291–4.Search in Google Scholar
12. Ginsberg GM, Eidelman AI, Shinwell E, Anis E, Peyser R, Lotan Y. Should Israel screen all mothers-to-be to prevent early-onset of neonatal group B streptococcal disease? A cost-utility analysis. Isr J Health Policy Res 2013;2:1.10.1186/2045-4015-2-6Search in Google Scholar
13. Sefty H, Klivitsky A, Bromberg M, Dichtiar R, Ben Ami M, ShohatT, et al. Factors associated with choice of approach for Group B streptococcus screening. Isr J Health Policy Res 2016;5:42.10.1186/s13584-016-0103-6Search in Google Scholar
14. Cheng P-J, Chueh H-Y, Liu C-M, Hsu J-J, Hsieh T-T, Soong Y-K. Risk factors for recurrence of group B streptococcus colonization in a subsequent pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111:704–9.10.1097/AOG.0b013e318163cd6bSearch in Google Scholar
15. Money DM, Dobson S. The prevention of early-onset neonatal group B streptococcal disease. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2004;26:826–40.10.1016/S1701-2163(16)30157-8Search in Google Scholar
16. Hughes RG, Brocklehurst P, Steer PJ, Heath P, Stenson BM, on behalf of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Prevention of early-onset neonatal group B streptococcal disease: green-top guideline no 36. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 2017;124:e280–305.10.1111/1471-0528.14821Search in Google Scholar PubMed
17. Committee UKNS. UK NSC group B streptococcus (GBS) recommendation. London, UK: NSC; 2017.Search in Google Scholar
18. Rodriguez-Granger J, Alvargonzalez JC, Berardi A, Berner R, Kunze M, Hufnagel M, et al. Prevention of group B streptococcal neonatal disease revisited. The DEVANI European project. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2012;31:2097–104.10.1007/s10096-012-1559-0Search in Google Scholar PubMed
19. Melin P, Efstratiou A. Group B streptococcal epidemiology and vaccine needs in developed countries. Vaccine 2013;31(Suppl 4):D31–42.10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.05.012Search in Google Scholar PubMed
20. Tzialla C, Berardi A, Farina C, Clerici P, Borghesi A, Viora E, et al. Strategies for preventing group B streptococcal infections in newborns: a nation-wide survey of Italian policies. Ital J Pediatr 2017;43:1–7.10.1186/s13052-017-0409-1Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
21. Sefty H, Friedman A, Shohat T. Incidence of early onset GBS sepsis final report 2010–2016; 2017. Available at: https://www.health.gov.il/PublicationsFiles/GBS.pdf. Accessed 1 Sep 2018.Search in Google Scholar
22. Hakansson S, Axemo P, Bremme K, Bryngelsson AL, Wallin MC, Ekström CM, et al. Group B streptococcal carriage in Sweden: a national study on risk factors for mother and infant colonisation. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008;87:50–8.10.1080/00016340701802888Search in Google Scholar PubMed
23. Ma TWL, Chan V, So CH, Hui ASY, Lee CN, Hui APW, et al. Prevention of early onset group B streptococcal disease by universal antenatal culture-based screening in all public hospitals in Hong Kong. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2018;31:881–7.10.1080/14767058.2017.1300649Search in Google Scholar PubMed
24. Cho CY, Tang YH, Chen YH, Wang SY, Yang YH, Wang TH, et al. Group B streptococcal infection in neonates and colonization in pregnant women: an epidemiological retrospective analysis. J Microbiol Immunol Infect 2017;pii: S1684-1182(17)30185-8. doi:10.1016/j.jmii.2017.08.004.Search in Google Scholar PubMed
25. Phares CR, Lynfield R, Farley MM, Mohle-Boetani J, Harrison LH, Petit S, et al. Epidemiology of invasive group B streptococcal disease in the United States, 1999–2005. J Am Med Assoc 2008;299:2056–65.10.1001/jama.299.17.2056Search in Google Scholar PubMed
26. Van Dyke MK, Phares CR, Lynfield R, Thomas AR, Arnold KE, Craig AS, et al. Evaluation of universal antenatal screening for group B streptococcus. N Engl J Med 2009;360:2626–36.10.1056/NEJMoa0806820Search in Google Scholar PubMed
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM)
- Original Articles – Obstetrics
- The value of amniotic fluid analysis in patients with suspected clinical chorioamnionitis
- Patients with acute cervical insufficiency without intra-amniotic infection/inflammation treated with cerclage have a good prognosis
- Maternal serum endocan concentrations are elevated in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes
- The earlier the gestational age, the greater the intensity of the intra-amniotic inflammatory response in women with preterm premature rupture of membranes and amniotic fluid infection by Ureaplasma species
- Assessment of maternal GBS colonization and early-onset neonatal disease rate for term deliveries: a decade perspective
- Clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
- Expression of genes involved in inflammation and growth – does sampling site in human full-term placenta matter?
- Impact of cell-free fetal DNA on invasive prenatal diagnostic tests in a real-world public setting
- Perinatal outcome in gestational diabetes according to different diagnostic criteria
- Original Articles – Fetus
- Change in fetal behavior in response to vibroacoustic stimulation
- Diagnostic accuracy of isolated clubfoot in twin compared to singleton gestations
- Original Article – Newborn
- Usefulness of transcutaneous bilirubin assessment measured in non-photo-exposed skin to guide the length of phototherapy: an observational study
- Letters to the Editor
- Methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
- Reply to the Letter to the Editor: methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large-for-gestational-age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM)
- Original Articles – Obstetrics
- The value of amniotic fluid analysis in patients with suspected clinical chorioamnionitis
- Patients with acute cervical insufficiency without intra-amniotic infection/inflammation treated with cerclage have a good prognosis
- Maternal serum endocan concentrations are elevated in patients with preterm premature rupture of membranes
- The earlier the gestational age, the greater the intensity of the intra-amniotic inflammatory response in women with preterm premature rupture of membranes and amniotic fluid infection by Ureaplasma species
- Assessment of maternal GBS colonization and early-onset neonatal disease rate for term deliveries: a decade perspective
- Clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
- Expression of genes involved in inflammation and growth – does sampling site in human full-term placenta matter?
- Impact of cell-free fetal DNA on invasive prenatal diagnostic tests in a real-world public setting
- Perinatal outcome in gestational diabetes according to different diagnostic criteria
- Original Articles – Fetus
- Change in fetal behavior in response to vibroacoustic stimulation
- Diagnostic accuracy of isolated clubfoot in twin compared to singleton gestations
- Original Article – Newborn
- Usefulness of transcutaneous bilirubin assessment measured in non-photo-exposed skin to guide the length of phototherapy: an observational study
- Letters to the Editor
- Methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large for gestational age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
- Reply to the Letter to the Editor: methodological issues on the clinical importance of the 75-g glucose tolerance test (GTT) in the prediction of large-for-gestational-age (LGA) fetuses in non-diabetic pregnancies
