ArticleActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2023
Evaluation of two rapid commercial assays for detection of Streptococcus agalactiae from vaginal samples.
Article in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid tests for detecting group B streptococcus colonization in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026Pooled it
- Performance evaluation of clinical diagnostic kits for Group BMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Intrapartum Molecular Detection of Group BMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a sensitive real-time PCR assay for Group B Streptococcus detection in vaginal-rectal swab.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- To evaluate the performance of simultaneous amplification and testing assay for group B Streptococcus detection: comparison with real-time PCR and ddPCR assays.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2024Article
- Significant Microbial Changes Are Evident in the Reproductive Tract of Pregnant Rhesus Monkeys at Mid-Gestation but Their Gut Microbiome Does Not Shift until Late Gestation.Microorganisms · 2023Article
- Evaluation of two rapid commercial assays for detection of Streptococcus agalactiae from vaginal samples.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStreptococcus agalactiae, also known as group B streptococci (GBS), is associated with invasive infections in neonates. Identification of GBS vaginal colonization in pregnant women before delivery is essential for treatment with antibiotics to prevent intrapartum vertical transmission to the newborn. This study was designed to evaluate applicability of two rapid real-time PCRs in comparison to standard culture identification. MATERIAL AND
methodsWe compared the Xpert GBS assay, hereafter referred to as Xpert, and GenomEra GBS PCR, hereafter referred to as GenomEra. The standard culture identification consisted of two different agar plates as well as an enrichment broth.
resultsWe analyzed vaginal samples of 260 pregnant women; 42 samples were tested GBS-positive by using standard culture as a gold standard, 30 by Xpert, and 37 by GenomEra. Xpert and GenomEra assays performed with sensitivities of 71.4% and 88.1% as well as specificities of 98.6% and 99.1%, respectively. Twelve vaginal samples were false-negative by Xpert and five samples by GenomEra. Interestingly, three negative Xpert results of standard culture-positive samples exhibited high Ct-values indicating the presence of GBS. If higher Ct-values are taken into consideration, the sensitivity of Xpert increases up to 78.6%. Moreover, only three Xpert PCRs had to be repeated, whereas two Genomera were invalid even after repetition and further 15 GenomEra PCRs were repeated because of borderline results or inhibition of the PCR test.
conclusionsIn this study, GenomEra assay performed with a higher sensitivity than the Xpert PCR. On the other hand, the Xpert assay needs less hands-on-time for a sample preparation and requires approximately four-fold less repetitions as compared to the GenomEra assay. This robust performance of the Xpert assay make it applicable as a rapid intrapartum point-of-care test, although a higher sensitivity would be desirable. Therefore, culture in the 35-37 week of gestation remains the gold standard to detect vaginal colonization.
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.