ArticleAnnals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials2024
Performances of two rapid LAMP-based techniques for the intrapartum detection of Group B Streptococcus vaginal colonization.
Article in Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- An extraction-free and one-pot two-temperature CRISPR/Cas12b system for visual detection of Group BJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Article
- Screening of Group BOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeGroup B Streptococcus (GBS) is the leading cause of invasive infections in newborns. The prevention of GBS neonatal disease relies on the administration of an intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis to GBS-colonized women. In recent years, rapid intrapartum detection of GBS vaginal colonization using real-time nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) emerged as an alternative to antenatal culture screening methods.
methodsWe compared the performances of two loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) tests, the Ampliflash® GBS and the PlusLife® GBS tests, to standard culture for GBS detection in vaginal specimens from pregnant women. The study was conducted from April to July 2023 in a French hospital of the Paris area.
resultsA total of 303 samples were analyzed, including 85 culture-positive samples (28.1%). The Ampliflash® GBS test and the PlusLife® GBS tests gave a result for 100% and 96.3% tests, respectively. The performances of the tests were as follows: sensitivity 87.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 78.3-92.6) and 98.7% (95% CI 93.0-99.8), specificity 99.1% (95% CI 96.7-99.8), and 91.9% (95% CI 87.3-95.0), respectively. False negative results of the Ampliflash® GBS test correlated with low-density GBS cultures. Time-to-results correlated with GBS culture density only for the PlusLife® GBS test (p < 0.001).
conclusionBoth techniques provide excellent analytical performances with high sensitivity and specificity together with a short turnaround time and results available in 10 to 35 min. Their potential to further reduce the burden of GBS neonatal disease compared with antenatal culture screening needs to be assessed in future clinical studies.
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.