ArticleThe Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale2012
Penicillin susceptibility and macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance in group B Streptococcus isolates from a Canadian hospital.
Article in The Canadian journal of infectious diseases & medical microbiology = Journal canadien des maladies infectieuses et de la microbiologie medicale, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent development and fighting strategies for lincosamide antibiotic resistance.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Drugs for the Prevention and Treatment of Sepsis in the Newborn.Clinics in perinatology · 2019Review
- Invasive group B streptococcal infection in infants in Shenzhen, China.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015Article
- Cloning, expression, purification, crystallization and preliminary X-ray diffraction analysis of glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase from Streptococcus agalactiae NEM316.Acta crystallographica. Section F, Structural biology communications · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) is recommended for pregnant women who test positive for group B Streptococcus (GBS) in their genitourinary tract to prevent GBS-induced neonatal sepsis. Penicillin G is used as the primary antibiotic, and clindamycin or erythromycin as the secondary, if allergies exist. Decreased susceptibility to penicillin G has occasionally been reported; however, clindamycin and erythromycin resistance is on the rise and is causing concern over the use of clindamycin and erythromycin IAP.
methodsAntibiotic resistance was characterized phenotypically using a D-Test for erythromycin and clindamycin, while an E-Test (E-strip) was used for penicillin G. GBS was isolated from vaginal-rectal swabs and serologically confirmed using Prolex (Pro-Lab Diagnostics, Canada) streptococcal grouping reagents. Susceptibility testing of isolates was performed according to the Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines.
resultsAll 158 isolates were penicillin G sensitive. Inducible macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B (MLSB) resistance was observed in 13.9% of isolates. Constitutive MLSB resistance was observed in 12.7% of isolates. M phenotype resistance was observed in 6.3% of isolates. In total, erythromycin resistance was present in 32.9% of the GBS isolates, while clindamycin resistance was present in 26.6%. DISCUSSION: The sampled GBS population showed no sign of reduced penicillin susceptibility, with all being well under susceptible minimum inhibitory concentration values. These data are congruent with the large body of evidence showing that penicillin G remains the most reliable clinical antibiotic for IAP. Clindamycin and erythromycin resistance was higher than expected, contributing to a growing body of evidence that suggests the re-evaluation of clindamycin and erythromycin IAP is warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.