Management of the neonate at risk for early-onset Group B streptococcal disease (GBS EOD): new paediatric guidelines in Belgium

Use of the "Sepsis Risk Calculator" in Belgian Newborns: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Prevention of early-onset neonatal sepsis (EONS) is a frequent reason why many newborns receive unnecessary antibiotics. The Sepsis Risk Calculator (SRC) was developed by the Kaiser Permanente Institute as a multivariate risk assessment of EONS, aiming to reduce laboratory testing and empiric neonatal antibiotic therapy. Our objective was to assess the potential of the SRC in reducing antibiotic use in our setting.

METHODS

Late preterm and term newborns who received antibiotics from 2019 to 2020 in a tertiary Belgian hospital were included. Newborn-specific data were collected and entered into the online SRC, retrospectively calculating a sepsis risk score and providing recommendations for antibiotic administration. False-positive indications for treatment by the SRC were estimated based on previously published data. Antibiotic therapy rates according to the SRC recommendations were compared to the actual rate of antibiotic therapy.

RESULTS

Of 5891 births, 414 newborns received antibiotics and were eligible for this study, representing a rate of 7.6% of newborns receiving antibiotics following our current guidelines. The SRC would have recommended antibiotic administration for 2.7%, reducing antibiotic therapy by 64.5%. Of 5 possible cases of EONS, 3 would have received antibiotics in the first 24 hours according to the SRC.

CONCLUSIONS

In this Belgian cohort, use of the SRC has the potential to significantly decrease by 64.5% the newborns that receive antibiotics. This reduction would primarily concern asymptomatic newborns. If use of the SRC was to be implemented in Belgian maternities, strict clinical surveillance practices should be ensured.

Is a positive Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test sensitive enough for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae?

Background

For a long time, the Christie-Atkinson-Munch-Peterson (CAMP) test has been a standard test for the identification of Streptococcus agalactiae, and a positive result for S.agalactiae has been considered sensitive enough.

Methods

To confirm whether a positive CAMP test is a requirement for the identification of S.agalactiae, five suspected CAMP-negative S.agalactiae isolates from two hospitals, confirmed as Gram-positive and catalase-negative streptococci, were verified by the CAMP test in three batches of plates from two manufacturers and identified by the Phoenix system, MALDI-TOF MS, the PCR assay and the 16S rDNA gene sequencing.

Results

All five suspected strains were S.agalactiae, four of which were CAMP-negative and one of which was not S.agalactiae by the PCR assay.

Conclusions

A positive CAMP test was lacking sensitivity for the identification of S.agalactiae, and the question of whether the cfb gene is worthy of targeting should be further studied.

Recognising early onset neonatal sepsis: an essential step in appropriate antimicrobial use

Early diagnosis and timely treatment of early onset neonatal sepsis (EOS) are essential to prevent life threatening complications. Subtle, nonspecific clinical presentation and low predictive values of biomarkers complicate early diagnosis. This uncertainty commonly results in unnecessary and prolonged empiric antibiotic treatment. Annually, approximately 395,000 neonates (7.9% of live term births) are treated for suspected EOS in the European Union, while the incidence of proven EOS varies between 0.01 and 0.53 per 1000 live births. Adherence to guidelines for the management of suspicion of EOS is poor. Pragmatic approaches to minimise overtreatment in neonates with suspected EOS, using combined stratified risk algorithms, based on maternal and perinatal risk factors, clinical characteristics of the neonate and sequential biomarkers are promising.

Variation in Current Management of Term and Late-preterm Neonates at Risk for Early-onset Sepsis: An International Survey and Review of Guidelines

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty about the presence of infection results in unnecessary and prolonged empiric antibiotic treatment of newborns at risk for early-onset sepsis (EOS). This study evaluates the impact of this uncertainty on the diversity in management.

METHODS

A web-based survey with questions addressing management of infection risk-adjusted scenarios was performed in Europe, North America, and Australia. Published national guidelines (n = 5) were reviewed and compared with the results of the survey.

RESULTS

439 Clinicians (68% were neonatologists) from 16 countries completed the survey. In the low-risk scenario, 29% would start antibiotic therapy and 26% would not, both groups without laboratory investigations; 45% would start if laboratory markers were abnormal. In the high-risk scenario, 99% would start antibiotic therapy. In the low-risk scenario, 89% would discontinue antibiotic therapy before 72 hours. In the high-risk scenario, 35% would discontinue therapy before 72 hours, 56% would continue therapy for 5-7 days, and 9% for more than 7 days. Laboratory investigations were used in 31% of scenarios for the decision to start, and in 72% for the decision to discontinue antibiotic treatment. National guidelines differ considerably regarding the decision to start in low-risk and regarding the decision to continue therapy in higher risk situations.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a broad diversity of clinical practice in management of EOS and a lack of agreement between current guidelines. The results of the survey reflect the diversity of national guidelines. Prospective studies regarding management of neonates at risk of EOS with safety endpoints are needed.

Haemophilus influenzae: a forgotten cause of neonatal sepsis?

Due to the introduction of the conjugate vaccine against serotype b, neonatal sepsis caused by Haemophilus influenzae became very rare. There is little data in Belgium concerning the prevalence of H. influenzae early onset neonatal sepsis and articles about neonatal sepsis and H. influenzae published in the last decade are scarce. We report two invasive infections with a non-typeable H. influenzae. These cases show that neonatal sepsis caused by non-typeable H. influenzae may be underestimated and we believe that there is need for a better registration of this kind of infection.