World journal of clinical cases · 2020
Streptococcus agalactiae: Identification methods, antimicrobial susceptibility, and resistance genes in pregnant women.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Santana Fabrícia Almeida Fernandes, de Oliveira Tais Viana Ledo, Filho Marcelo Barreto de Souza, da Silva Lucas Santana Coelho, de Brito Breno Bittencourt, de Melo Fabrício Freire, Souza Cláudio Lima, Marques Lucas Miranda, Oliveira Márcio Vasconcelos
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is a normal component of the gastrointestinal and genital microbiota in humans and can lead to important infections in newborns.
AIM: To compare GBS isolation and identification methods as well as to assess the antibiotic susceptibility and to identify resistance genes in GBS strains from pregnant women attended in healthcare services from the city of Vitória da Conquista, in Bahia State, Brazil.
METHODS: From January 2017 to February 2018, vaginorectal swabs were obtained from 186 participants and the samples were seeded onto chromogenic agar for GBS before and after inoculation in selective broth. Confirmatory identification using 3 CAMP and latex tests was performed in samples with GBS-suggestive colonies. Then, disk diffusion antibiograms were performed in GBS-positive samples, and the detection of the resistance genes ermB, ermTR, mefA, and linB in the clindamycin and/or erythromycin-resistant samples was carried out.
RESULTS: Thirty-two samples (17.2%) were GBS-positive. The culture in chromogenic agar after sample incubation in selective broth was the most sensitive method (96.9%) for GBS detection. All isolates were susceptible to penicillin, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and vancomycin. Clindamycin resistance was observed in 6 samples (18.8%), while 8 samples (25%) were erythromycin-resistant. All erythromycin and/or clindamycin-resistant GBS strains had negative D-tests. Two strains (25%) presented an M phenotype and 6 isolates (75%) presented a cMLSB phenotype. The ermB gene was identified in 4 samples (44.4%), the mefA gene was also found in 4 samples (44.4%), the ermTR gene was identified in 1 isolate (11.1%), and the linB gene was not found in any isolate.
CONCLUSION: This study evidenced that the screening for SGB can be performed by means of various methods, including chromogenic media, and that the chemoprophylaxis for pregnant women who cannot use penicillin must be susceptibility-guided.
AIM: To compare GBS isolation and identification methods as well as to assess the antibiotic susceptibility and to identify resistance genes in GBS strains from pregnant women attended in healthcare services from the city of Vitória da Conquista, in Bahia State, Brazil.
METHODS: From January 2017 to February 2018, vaginorectal swabs were obtained from 186 participants and the samples were seeded onto chromogenic agar for GBS before and after inoculation in selective broth. Confirmatory identification using 3 CAMP and latex tests was performed in samples with GBS-suggestive colonies. Then, disk diffusion antibiograms were performed in GBS-positive samples, and the detection of the resistance genes ermB, ermTR, mefA, and linB in the clindamycin and/or erythromycin-resistant samples was carried out.
RESULTS: Thirty-two samples (17.2%) were GBS-positive. The culture in chromogenic agar after sample incubation in selective broth was the most sensitive method (96.9%) for GBS detection. All isolates were susceptible to penicillin, ampicillin, cefotaxime, and vancomycin. Clindamycin resistance was observed in 6 samples (18.8%), while 8 samples (25%) were erythromycin-resistant. All erythromycin and/or clindamycin-resistant GBS strains had negative D-tests. Two strains (25%) presented an M phenotype and 6 isolates (75%) presented a cMLSB phenotype. The ermB gene was identified in 4 samples (44.4%), the mefA gene was also found in 4 samples (44.4%), the ermTR gene was identified in 1 isolate (11.1%), and the linB gene was not found in any isolate.
CONCLUSION: This study evidenced that the screening for SGB can be performed by means of various methods, including chromogenic media, and that the chemoprophylaxis for pregnant women who cannot use penicillin must be susceptibility-guided.