Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 27, 2026

A Murine Model of Group B Streptococcus Vaginal Colonization
Published on: November 16, 2016
Rapid tests for detecting group B streptococcus colonization in pregnant women: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Edgar Páez-Castellanos1,2, Alvaro Javier Burgos-Cárdenas2,3, Hernando Gaitán-Duarte1,2
1Faculty of Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá D.C., Colombia.
Background:
Maternal colonization with group B Streptococcus is common and the leading cause of neonatal sepsis. Rapid tests can be an alternative for screening; however, their diagnostic accuracy is variable when used with non-enriched samples.
Objectives:
To determine the diagnostic accuracy of rapid tests based on nucleic acid amplification techniques (NAAT) without prior enrichment for detecting group B Streptococcus colonization in pregnant women.
Search Strategy:
Systematic searches of databases (Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, LILACS) from inception until February 2025, ongoing studies and gray literature.
Selection Criteria:
We included diagnostic accuracy studies in which participants were recruited prospectively, consecutively, or randomly; measurement and data collection had to be prospective. We excluded case-control studies.
Data Collection And Analysis:
We extracted data in duplicate. We assessed the quality of the included studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. For the meta-analysis, we used the bivariate model by estimating a summary sensitivity and specificity. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to diagnostic test accuracy to compile the summary of findings tables.
Main Results:
A total of 52 studies (24 653 participants) met the inclusion criteria; the median sample size was 299, and the median colonization prevalence was 21.4%. For qPCR-based rapid tests, the sensitivity was 90% (95% CI: 88%-92%), and the specificity was 96% (95% CI: 95%-97%). For the LAMP-based test, the sensitivity was 92% (95% CI: 84%-97%), and the specificity was 96% (95% CI: 94%-98%). When exploring study entry status, sample source, and test processing in the delivery room as sources of heterogeneity, we found no statistically significant differences between the subgroups analyzed (P = 0.19, P = 0.43, and P = 0.44). We found no evidence of publication bias when analyzing the asymmetry in the funnel plot.
Conclusions:
Rapid qPCR-based tests may have acceptable sensitivity (low-certainty evidence), and they probably have acceptable specificity (moderate-certainty evidence). For the LAMP-based tests, the evidence is very uncertain regarding the acceptability of sensitivity (very low-certainty evidence), but specificity is probably acceptable (moderate-certainty evidence) for detecting GBS colonization in pregnant women. Applicability is limited in intrapartum settings due to sample processing and in low- and middle-income settings.
Prospero Registration:
CRD42024536503.
More Related Videos
07:59Rapid and Specific Detection of Acinetobacter baumannii Infections Using a Recombinase Polymerase Amplification/Cas12a-based System
Published on: April 25, 2025
09:07Author Spotlight: Accelerating Diagnostic Accuracy with Direct Identification of Gram-Negatives from Blood Culture Bottles
Published on: May 24, 2024