Cargando…

Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates two procedures for typing of Streptococcus agalactiae (group B streptococci; GBS) isolates, using retrospective typing data from the period 2010 to 2014 with a commercial latex agglutination test (latex test) and the Lancefield precipitation test (LP test). Furthermo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Slotved, Hans-Christian, Hoffmann, Steen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28321367
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3105
_version_ 1782516017693458432
author Slotved, Hans-Christian
Hoffmann, Steen
author_facet Slotved, Hans-Christian
Hoffmann, Steen
author_sort Slotved, Hans-Christian
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This study evaluates two procedures for typing of Streptococcus agalactiae (group B streptococci; GBS) isolates, using retrospective typing data from the period 2010 to 2014 with a commercial latex agglutination test (latex test) and the Lancefield precipitation test (LP test). Furthermore, the genotype distribution of phenotypically non-typable (NT) GBS isolates is presented. We also raise the awareness, that the difference in typing results obtained by phenotypical methods and genotype based methods may have implications on vaccine surveillance in case a GBS vaccine is introduced. METHODS: A total of 616 clinical GBS isolates from 2010 to 2014 were tested with both a latex test and the LP test. Among these, 66 isolates were genotyped by PCR, including 41 isolates that were phenotypically NT. RESULTS: The latex test provided a serotype for 83.8% of the isolates (95% CI [80.7–86.6]) compared to 87.5% (95% CI [84.6–90.0]) obtained by the LP method. The two assays provided identical capsular identification for all sero-typeable isolates (excluding NT isolates). The PCR assay provided a genotype designation to the 41 isolates defined as phenotypically NT isolates. DISCUSSION: We found that the latex test showed a slightly lower identification percentage than the LP test. Our recommendation is to use the latex agglutination as the routine primary assay for GBS surveillance, and then use the more labour intensive precipitation test on the NT isolates to increase the serotyping rate. A genotype could be assigned to all the phenotypically NT isolates, however, as a consequence genotyping will overestimate the coverage from possible future capsular polysaccharide based GBS vaccines.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5357338
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53573382017-03-20 Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study Slotved, Hans-Christian Hoffmann, Steen PeerJ Microbiology BACKGROUND: This study evaluates two procedures for typing of Streptococcus agalactiae (group B streptococci; GBS) isolates, using retrospective typing data from the period 2010 to 2014 with a commercial latex agglutination test (latex test) and the Lancefield precipitation test (LP test). Furthermore, the genotype distribution of phenotypically non-typable (NT) GBS isolates is presented. We also raise the awareness, that the difference in typing results obtained by phenotypical methods and genotype based methods may have implications on vaccine surveillance in case a GBS vaccine is introduced. METHODS: A total of 616 clinical GBS isolates from 2010 to 2014 were tested with both a latex test and the LP test. Among these, 66 isolates were genotyped by PCR, including 41 isolates that were phenotypically NT. RESULTS: The latex test provided a serotype for 83.8% of the isolates (95% CI [80.7–86.6]) compared to 87.5% (95% CI [84.6–90.0]) obtained by the LP method. The two assays provided identical capsular identification for all sero-typeable isolates (excluding NT isolates). The PCR assay provided a genotype designation to the 41 isolates defined as phenotypically NT isolates. DISCUSSION: We found that the latex test showed a slightly lower identification percentage than the LP test. Our recommendation is to use the latex agglutination as the routine primary assay for GBS surveillance, and then use the more labour intensive precipitation test on the NT isolates to increase the serotyping rate. A genotype could be assigned to all the phenotypically NT isolates, however, as a consequence genotyping will overestimate the coverage from possible future capsular polysaccharide based GBS vaccines. PeerJ Inc. 2017-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5357338/ /pubmed/28321367 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3105 Text en ©2017 Slotved and Hoffmann http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Microbiology
Slotved, Hans-Christian
Hoffmann, Steen
Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study
title Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study
title_full Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study
title_fullStr Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study
title_short Evaluation of procedures for typing of group B Streptococcus: a retrospective study
title_sort evaluation of procedures for typing of group b streptococcus: a retrospective study
topic Microbiology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5357338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28321367
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3105
work_keys_str_mv AT slotvedhanschristian evaluationofproceduresfortypingofgroupbstreptococcusaretrospectivestudy
AT hoffmannsteen evaluationofproceduresfortypingofgroupbstreptococcusaretrospectivestudy