2017
DOI: 10.1590/0037-8682-0454-2016
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Introduction: Group B Streptococcus (GBS), a source of neonatal infection, colonizes the gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts of pregnant women. Routine screening for maternal GBS in late pregnancy and consequent intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis have reduced the incidence of early-onset GBS neonatal infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of PCR, compared to culture (gold standard), in GBS colonization screening of pregnant women, and to establish the prevalence of GBS colonizat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
19
0
4

Year Published

2017
2017
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(24 reference statements)
1
19
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Although the revised CDC guidelines [1] recommend universal culture-based GBS screening between 35 and 37 weeks of pregnancy, the use of molecular methods as an additional rapid method of detection is encouraged. In concordance to our data, increased GBS detection rates by PCR assays compared to culture have been previously reported [15,23] with comparable results [5,6,8,24] or with lower colonization rates than the ones observed in this study [25]. However, previous data showed comparable performance of PCR method to culture [14].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Culture-based methods remain the gold standard for GBS detection; however, numerous studies have suggested molecular methods, such as PCR, are more sensitive and specific compared to culture and represent a point-of-care detection option (El Helali et al 2009;de-Paris et al 2011;Khalil et al 2017;Wollheim et al 2017;Relich et al 2018). Cost-effectiveness is another consideration when evaluating screening methods, particularly in GBS where universal screening is implemented (Kaambwa et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The CDC guidelines also cite other laboratory tests for GBS detection, including PCR methods. PCR-based approaches are gaining a promising role in GBS detection, largely due to their higher sensitivity [6,13,18]. A European consensus statement noted that failure to treat GBS-positive mothers could lead to serious adverse neonatal outcomes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Já em nível nacional, um estudo recente, com gestantes do Paraná, apresentou prevalência de 28,4% (MELO et al, 2018). Em âmbito regional, destaca-se um estudo realizado em Caxias do Sul, com 204 gestantes, estando a prevalência próxima aos valores do estudo, os quais variam de 22,5% (vaginal) a 26% (perianal) (WOLLHEIM et al, 2017). Da mesma forma, a prevalência aqui encontrada condiz com os valores presentes na literatura, os quais variam entre 10% a 30%, estando a maioria acima de 20% (AREAL et al, 2010;BARCAITE et al, 2008;MENGIST et al, 2017;PENELAS e PINHEIRO, 2016;PINTO et al, 2017).…”
Section: Discussionunclassified
“…Wollheim, et al, conducted a similar study, setting out to explore the effectiveness of PCR assay in comparison to the gold standard culture. They utilized an experimental approach, comparing culture with supplemented gentamicin, nalidixic acid, and sheep blood agar to PCR assay [ 8 ]. Double blinding was utilized as the patient and experimenter were blinded to the GBS status of each patient.…”
Section: Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%