Objective. To determine the validity of a novel Group B Streptococcus (GBS) diagnostic assay for the detection of GBS in antepartum patients. Study Design. Women were screened for GBS colonization at 35 to 37 weeks of gestation. Three vaginal-rectal swabs were collected per patient; two were processed by traditional culture (commercial laboratory versus in-house culture), and the third was processed by an immunoblot-based test, in which a sample is placed over an antibody-coated nitrocellulose membrane, and after a six-hour culture, bound GBS is detected with a secondary antibody. Results. 356 patients were evaluated. Commercial processing revealed a GBS prevalence rate of 85/356 (23.6%). In-house culture provided a prevalence rate of 105/356 (29.5%). When the accelerated GBS test result was compared to the in-house GBS culture, it demonstrated a sensitivity of 97.1% and a specificity of 88.4%. Interobserver reliability for the novel GBS test was 88.2%. Conclusions. The accelerated GBS test provides a high level of validity for the detection of GBS colonization in antepartum patients within 6.5 hours and demonstrates a substantial agreement between observers. 1. Introduction Group B Streptococcus (GBS) has been shown to cause significant neonatal morbidity, and current national guidelines recommend antenatal screening be performed on all pregnant women between 35 to 37 weeks gestation [1]. Current culture methods for GBS require 48 hours for identification, and if antibiotic sensitivity is necessary, an additional 24 hours may be needed [2]. Culture of GBS is routinely performed on agar supplemented with sheep’s blood, and colonies are detected by the breakdown of red blood cells, producing a characteristic zone of hemolysis, termed beta hemolysis [3]. The presence of GBS may be confirmed by performing Gram stain, CAMP testing, or typing via an agglutinin reaction on selected beta-hemolytic colonies [1]. This is often labor intensive, and in cases in which the patient’s sample contains many different species, beta hemolysis may be missed [4–6]. There is the risk that samples may be overgrown with competing organisms, such as Proteus or Enterococcus, and false negatives are not uncommon. When hemolysis is identified, follow-up testing is often required to prevent a false positive from being reported [7]. While culture continues to be regarded as the gold standard, it is labor intensive and is not without shortcomings. Several options are available which attempt to address the deficiencies inherent with traditional culture techniques. The most notable of
References
[1]
J. R. Verani, L. McGee, and S. J. Schrag, “Prevention of perinatal group B streptococcal disease revised guidelines from CDC, 2010,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, vol. 59, no. 10, pp. 1–36, 2010.
[2]
D. Smith, J. D. Perry, L. Laine, A. Galloway, and F. K. Gould, “Comparison of BD GeneOhm real-time polymerase chain reaction with chromogenic and conventional culture methods for detection of group B Streptococcus in clinical samples,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 369–372, 2008.
[3]
S. Schrag, R. Gorwitz, K. Fultz-Butts, and A. Schuchat, “Prevention of perinatal group B streptococcal disease. Revised guidelines from CDC,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, vol. 51, pp. 1–22, 2002.
[4]
J. Schwartz, B. Robinson-Dunn, J. Makin, and B. L. Boyanton, “Evaluation of the BD MAX GBS assay to detect Streptococcus group B in LIM broth-enriched antepartum vaginal-rectal specimens,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 73, pp. 97–98, 2012.
[5]
D. L. Church, H. Baxter, T. Lloyd, B. Miller, and S. Elsayed, “Evaluation of StrepB Carrot Broth versus Lim broth for detection of group B Streptococcus colonization status of near-term pregnant women,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 2780–2782, 2008.
[6]
A. Adler, C. Block, D. Engelstein, D. Hochner-Celnikcier, R. Drai-Hassid, and A. E. Moses, “Culture-based methods for detection and identification of Streptococcus agalactiae in pregnant women—what are we missing?” European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 241–243, 2008.
[7]
G. Bou, M. Figueira, D. Canle, M. Cartelle, J. M. Eiros, and R. Villanueva, “Evaluation of group B Streptococcus differential agar for detection and isolation of Streptococcus agalactiae,” Clinical Microbiology and Infection, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 676–678, 2005.
[8]
R. Te Witt, P. M. Oostvogel, R. Yahiaoui, Y. Wu, A. van Belkom, and A. E. Muller, “In vitro evaluation of the performance of Granada selective enrichment broth for the detection of group B streptococcal colonization,” European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 357–363, 2012.
[9]
J. Faro, A. Katz, K. Bishop, G. Riddle, and S. Faro, “Rapid diagnostic test for identifying group B Streptococcus,” American Journal of Perinatology, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 811–814, 2011.
[10]
J. P. Faro, K. Bishop, G. Riddle, A. Katz, and S. Faro, “Optimization of a rapid diagnostic test for detection of group B Streptococcus from antepartum patients,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 73, no. 3, pp. 236–238, 2012.
[11]
J. Faro, A. Katz, M. Ramirez et al., “Rapid test for growth and determination of antibiotic sensitivity of Group B Streptococcus, (GBS) in antepartum women,” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, vol. 206, supplement 1, p. S268, 2012.
[12]
P. M. Bossuyt, J. B. Reitsma, D. E. Bruns et al., “Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 138, no. 1, pp. 40–44, 2003.
[13]
CDC, “Laboratory practices for prenatal group B streptococcal screening and reporting—Connecticut, Georgia, and Minnesota, 1997-1998,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, vol. 48, pp. 426–428, 1999.
[14]
J. R. Landis and G. G. Koch, “The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data,” Biometrics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 159–174, 1977.
[15]
J. Faro, K. Bishop, G. Riddle, A. Katz, and S. Faro, “Detection of group B Streptococcus in under one hour by a newly-developed antibody-based rapid assay,” in Proceedings of the 79th Annual Meeting Central Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, vol. 33, 2012.
[16]
H. D. Davies, M. A. Miller, S. Faro, D. Gregson, S. C. Kehl, and J. A. Jordan, “Multicenter study of a rapid molecular-based assay for the diagnosis of group B Streptococcus colonization in pregnant women,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 39, no. 8, pp. 1129–1135, 2004.
[17]
N. Aziz, E. J. Baron, H. D'Souza, M. Nourbakhsh, M. L. Druzin, and W. E. Benitz, “Comparison of rapid intrapartum screening methods for group B streptococcal vaginal colonization,” Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 225–229, 2005.
[18]
K. L. Atkins, R. M. Atkinson, A. Shanks, C. A. Parvin, W. M. Dunne, and G. Gross, “Evaluation of polymerase chain reaction for group B Streptococcus colonization,” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, vol. 197, pp. 388.e1–388.e4, 2007.
[19]
D. Smith, J. D. Perry, L. Laine, A. Galloway, and F. K. Gould, “Comparison of BD GeneOhm real-time polymerase chain reaction with chromogenic and conventional culture methods for detection of group B Streptococcus in clinical samples,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 369–372, 2008.
[20]
B. C. Young, L. E. Dodge, M. Gupta, J. S. Rhee, and M. R. Hacker, “Evaluation of a rapid, real-time intrapartum group B streptococcal assay,” American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, vol. 205, no. 4, pp. 372.e1–372.e6, 2011.