An Emerging Infection: Streptococcal Toxic Shock-Like Syndrome Caused By Group B Streptococcus (GBS), Streptococcus Agalactiae

2020 ◽  
Vol 154 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S140-S140
Author(s):  
F Rajack ◽  
A Afsari ◽  
A M Ramadan ◽  
T J Naab

Abstract Introduction/Objective Streptococcus agalactiae, Group B Streptococcus (GBS), is a major cause of neonatal sepsis and infections in pregnant women. However, incidence of invasive GBS infections has more than doubled in the last two decades with highest risk in adults 65 years or older. Other risk factors are diabetes, malignancy, and immunocompromised state. Bacteremia and skin soft tissue infections are the most common invasive infections in nonpregnant adults. Rarely GBS infection has a fulminating pyrogenic exotoxin-mediated course characterized by acute onset, multiorgan failure, shock, and sometimes death, referred to as toxic shock-like syndrome. Methods A 77-year-old hypertensive female with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus and a history of bilateral foot ulcers presented to the hospital in probable septic shock. Clinical diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis was made and she underwent bilateral lower limb amputations. Results Grossly soft tissue appeared gray. Microscopically fascia was necrotic without neutrophils present and Gram stain revealed sheets of Gram positive cocci. These findings reflected histopathologic Stage III necrotizing fasciitis, which is associated with 47% mortality. Autopsy showed a similar histology of Stage III necrotizing fasciitis involving the surgical stump. Erythema and desquamation of the upper limbs bilaterally and multi-organ failure met the clinical picture of Streptococcal Toxic Shock Syndrome (STSS) and fulfilled the criteria for TSS due to Group A Streptococcus (GAS), defined by The Working Group on Severe Streptococcal Infections. Conclusion Group B Streptococcal Toxic Shock-Like Syndrome may have a similar outcome to STSS caused by GAS and other pathogens and, in limited studies, mortality has been 30% or greater.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leila Goudarzi ◽  
Mohammad Bagher Khalili ◽  
Mahmood Vakili ◽  
Maryam Sadeh

Consequence of Streptococcus agalactiae, Group B Streptococcus (GBS) relating infant’s diseases are well documented. Although many women carry this bacterium in their vagina, they may transfer to their infant during delivery and may result in different neonatal invasive diseases. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of GBS and serotyping the isolated species among un-selective non-pregnant women who attended two gynecology clinics in Tehran. In this cross-sectional study, a total of 560 vaginal samples collected from non-pregnant women. Following inoculation of the specimen on Blood Agar, the standard technology was applied for the final identification of GBS. Detected GBS species were further confirmed using specific PCR directed on dlts gene. Capsular serotyping was done by using the multiplex PCR method. The chi-square method was used for statistical analysis. Fifty (8.9%) out of 560 non-pregnant women were carriers of GBS. The most common types were III (36%), followed by type II (32%), Ia (26%), and Ib (6%), respectively. Results represent that the prevalence rate of GBS in non-pregnant women was reliable and similar to what obtained from pregnant women. In addition, the serotype III was found the most dominant types, as well as other investigations in the Tehran area. Therefore, vaccine designation based on type III is recommended.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 204993612094242
Author(s):  
Guduru Gopal Rao ◽  
Priya Khanna

Streptococcus agalactiae, also known as Group B streptococcus (GBS) is the commonest cause of early onset sepsis in newborns in developed high-income countries. Intrapartum antimicrobial (antibiotic) prophylaxis (IAP) is recognized to be highly effective in preventing early onset Group B sepsis (EOGBS) in newborns. The key controversy is about the strategy that should be used to identify mothers who should receive IAP. There are two strategies that are followed in developed countries: screening-based or risk-factor-based identification of women requiring IAP. The debate regarding which of the two approaches is better has intensified in the recent years with concerns about antimicrobial resistance, effect on newborn’s microbiome and other adverse effects. In this review, we have discussed some of the key research papers published in the period 2015–2019 that have addressed the relative merits and disadvantages of screening versus risk-factor-based identification of women requiring IAP. Although screening-based IAP appears to be more efficacious than risk-based IAP, IAP-based prevention has several limitations including ineffectiveness in prevention of late-onset GBS infection in babies, premature and still births, impact of IAP on neonatal microbiota, emergence of antimicrobial resistance and difficulties in implementing IAP-based strategies in middle and low income countries. Alternative strategies, principally maternal immunization against GBS would circumvent use of IAP. However, no licensed vaccines are currently available for use.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document