4.7 Article

Genotypic diversity and serotype distribution of group B Streptococcus isolated from women before and after delivery

期刊

CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES
卷 46, 期 12, 页码 1829-1837

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1086/588296

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI066081, AI066081] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Most studies of the dynamics of maternal group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonization have relied on capsular serotyping to define GBS acquisition or loss. Newer molecular methods that distinguish GBS clones may expand our knowledge and influence vaccination strategies. We used multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and GBS capsular gene cluster (cps) genotyping to investigate the dynamics of perinatal GBS colonization. Methods. A total of 338 GBS isolates obtained from 212 colonized women who were enrolled in a prior prospective cohort study were serotyped and genotyped by MLST and cps typing before (visit 1) and 6 weeks after (visit 2) delivery. Results. Of the 212 women, 126 were colonized at both visits, whereas 66 lost and 20 acquired GBS by visit 2. MLST of the 338 strains identified 29 sequence types marking distinct bacterial clones. A change in sequence type or cps and serotype occurred in 23 (18.3%) of the 126 women who were colonized at both visits. Specific sequence types were associated with GBS loss and persistence. Older maternal age and exclusive intrapartum antibiotic use were associated with persistent colonization. Conclusions. Although most GBS-positive pregnant women were stably colonized during the peripartum period, we detected changes in capsule expression and recolonization with antigenically distinct GBS clones over time by applying MLST. Combining the epidemiologic and molecular typing data revealed host factors and clones associated with persistent colonization, as well as a clone that was more readily lost. This knowledge is useful for the development of prevention and intervention strategies to reduce the likelihood of maternal GBS colonization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据