Group B Strep Support Thread

[7th_heaven]

hi-
i really took a few hours and read everything on this thread and am so grateful that you all did such great work researching this.
i am very likely GBS+ this pregnancy as i had a GBS+ urine culture, was given antibiotics, and repeated the culture as positive again! i denied the antibiotics the second time around when the mw couldn't answer me as to what would happen if i just let the GBS go.
with my 6th child i adopted a regimen or diet to remove GBS from my system.
here is a letter to the editor of a health magazine detailing my regimen. i tested negative and it impacted my birth in such a positive way. it could have gone ALOT differently had i been negative.

this time around- since i have already had GBS in my urine- a GBS that was particularly resistant to meds i will be adopting a stricter regimen. this regimen is not designed to "trick" the test. it's designed to boost my immune system and recolonize my gut and bladder.
here is my list...

1. no sugar. not even honey or maple syrup(i already do this). limited grains and fruits.
2. fermented cod liver oil 2 tsp in am, 2 tsp in pm.
3. yogurt, kefir, and/or homemade saurkraut at EVERY meal.
4. probiotics daily starting at 30 weeks.
5. couple's shower before sex
6. raw garlic orally twice a week starting at 30 weeks- at night since it takes about 8 hours to get stench to subside. guacamole anyone?

i'll probably add some things as i think of them but this is the brunt of it.

 

[PeanutBean]

Thanks for posting your get-negative regimen, I'm sure it will be very helpful to mums. I hope your culture goes away before the birth, best of luck! Please let us know how you get on, it would be really useful to know. I think you might be the first person on the thread with a positive urine test.

 

[7th_heaven]

Yes- I was surprised I had a uti. They called with the results and I was shocked bc I was asymptomatic. I actually didn't take the rx for a full week thinking I could treat on my own with cranberry and blueberry pills and juice. I bought a uti home test to see if it worked- the results weren't conclusive and so I decided to take the rx. As I said, my second test was positive again. She said that gbs urine screens were a fairly new protocol to this practice. And I figured since I was asymptomatic I bet alot of people are waking around unawares that they have a gbs uti.

 

[PeanutBean]

Because it's one of the risk factors for infection in the baby in the UK our pee is checked for it at our booking in appointment even though we don't have a screening programme for colonisation as there is in the states.

 

[7th_heaven]

I did read that it means there is and extreme overgrowth. I hope my regimen works!

 

[madcatwoman]

Ive been meaning to add another post on here since my last one. What ive been meaning to say is, i was never aware of the effect the IV antibiotics could have on me months later(maybe i should of been), but since having my boy 3 months ago ive had quite a few stomach upsets, feeling sick, having the squits and generally off colour. In the end i saw a doc about this.
Because every single type of bacteria in my gut was killed off, its left my stomach all...well.erm 'wrong' basically!, its going to take a while for all the right types of bacteria to re establish again!

 

[Mervs Mum]

Does anyone know what the chances of developing GBS are after a NEGATIVE swab at 38wks? My client is STILL being pursued by mws, consultants and now her GP! she's just had a negative after an incidental positive around 25 weeks and they are STILL hounding her for IV ABs!! I can't find anything in the RCOG guidelines about this situation ie positive earlier and negative in late pregnancy. I wondered what the risk reduces to....any help much appreciated!!

ETA I have now read the WHOLE thread!! I can't see anything to specific so my search will continue!

 

[PeanutBean]

Here you go MM:

Results
Group B streptococci were identified in specimens from 219 of 826 women (26.5%). The sensitivity of late antenatal cultures for identifying colonization status at delivery was 87% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 83–92). Specificity was 96% (95% CI 95–98). Positive predictive value was 87% (95% CI 83–92), and negative predictive value was 96% (95% CI 95–98). Test performance was similar from 1–5 weeks before delivery, but declined when 6 or more weeks had elapsed between the antenatal culture and delivery. Among patients cultured 6 or more weeks before delivery, sensitivity was only 43%, specificity 85%, and positive and negative predictive values were 50 and 81%, respectively. We estimated positive and negative predictive values of 85 and 97% for a colonization rate of 20%, and 79 and 98% for a colonization rate of 15%.

The accuracy of late antenatal screening cultures in predicting genital group B streptococcal colonization at delivery (Yancey et al)
Obstetrics & Gynecology
Volume 88, Issue 5, November 1996, Pages 811-815

 

[Mervs Mum]

Thank you sooooo much!!

 

[5ara]

Ive been meaning to add another post on here since my last one. What ive been meaning to say is, i was never aware of the effect the IV antibiotics could have on me months later(maybe i should of been), but since having my boy 3 months ago ive had quite a few stomach upsets, feeling sick, having the squits and generally off colour. In the end i saw a doc about this.
Because every single type of bacteria in my gut was killed off, its left my stomach all...well.erm 'wrong' basically!, its going to take a while for all the right types of bacteria to re establish again!

This is why I was so opposed to getting ABs. You also have to watch out for thrush, if you're BFing. They don't put all that in the literature they give you on GBS. I think it's wrong to not give us full info or allow women a choice (if you have no other hi-risk factors).

UPDATE: I ended up being "blackmailed" by my MW into getting IV ABs after being told I wouldn't be forced. It ruined what would have otherwise been a lovely birth experience. I know I should appreciate that everything went well, but I really resent how I was coerced and made to feel anxious and upset during my labor. I haven't had any problems since, luckily, but I've decided on home birth next time. I'm really angry with my MW.

 

[PeanutBean]

I'm so sorry 5ara. It's just ridiculous the way the health professionals are acting about this. The cynic in me says it's all so they don't get sued over that one baby that might die when they didn't give antibiotics. It's extremely clear from the literature that by far the hugest risk factor is prematurity so babies born after 37 weeks should be under different guidelines IMO. I would also love to see the breakdown of circumstances in those getting gbs after 37 weeks. I'd bet my bottom dollar they are made up of inductions, elective sections or in association with other congenital issues that could explain a weakened or undeveloped immune system.

 

[Mervs Mum]

I'm so sorry 5ara. It's just ridiculous the way the health professionals are acting about this. The cynic in me says it's all so they don't get sued over that one baby that might die when they didn't give antibiotics. It's extremely clear from the literature that by far the hugest risk factor is prematurity so babies born after 37 weeks should be under different guidelines IMO. I would also love to see the breakdown of circumstances in those getting gbs after 37 weeks. I'd bet my bottom dollar they are made up of inductions, elective sections or in association with other congenital issues that could explain a weakened or undeveloped immune system.

The cynic in you?! The realist more like!! Defensive medicine at its best.....or worst....

 

[PeanutBean]

I know. I just want to cling to the illusion that the NHS remains better than healthcare in the US.

 

[firstLO]

Does anyone know what the chances of developing GBS are after a NEGATIVE swab at 38wks? My client is STILL being pursued by mws, consultants and now her GP! she's just had a negative after an incidental positive around 25 weeks and they are STILL hounding her for IV ABs!! I can't find anything in the RCOG guidelines about this situation ie positive earlier and negative in late pregnancy. I wondered what the risk reduces to....any help much appreciated!!

ETA I have now read the WHOLE thread!! I can't see anything to specific so my search will continue!

I am in a similar situation to this although I haven't had the results of my private tests back as yet to know if still positive or not. I was diagnosed GBS positive after a vaginal swab was taken at 6 weeks cos I'd had some bleeding. I was then told I would have to have antibiotics during labour and wouldn't be re-tested at the end of the pregnancy as it might give a false negative and so they would still give the antibiotics.
I wasn't happy with this as I knew from my research that GBS comes and goes and that I could quite easily have lost carriage by the end of pregnancy and also that the private ECM test is far more reliable than the NHS test. I therefore bought a private test and rang a midwife yesterday to ask if she would do it for me. I was however shocked when she was quite off with me and said they would have nothing to do with the private tests and even if my result came back negative they would still want to give me antibiotics! I find it ridiculous that they have all the GBS Support leaflets scattered about at the hospital and then won't help you when you want to be tested because it's private but the don't routinely offer there own test! I know I already have a positive result but I was only 6 weeks for godsake!
I was then fortunate enough to get an app with a young female GP who had a 10m baby herself and completely understood and did the test for me. I'm now just waiting for the results and feeling very stressed about the whole thing. If I'm still positive I'm going to be worried about the side effects of antibiotics and won't get the kind of birth experience I want and if it's negative I can see I'm still going to have a battle on my hands when all I want is a nice relaxed labour. Why does it all have to be so complicated

 

[PeanutBean]

FirstLO I don't know if you've been right through the thread but it's worth it. Madcatwoman above got the private test and it taken on board by the mw though she had to see a consultant about it (apparently for no purpose at all). You'll find lots of research in the thread which should you turn out to be positive might help you choose what amount of intervention you want and when and what the risks and alternatives are.

 

[7th_heaven]

I'm so sorry 5ara. It's just ridiculous the way the health professionals are acting about this. The cynic in me says it's all so they don't get sued over that one baby that might die when they didn't give antibiotics. It's extremely clear from the literature that by far the hugest risk factor is prematurity so babies born after 37 weeks should be under different guidelines IMO. I would also love to see the breakdown of circumstances in those getting gbs after 37 weeks. I'd bet my bottom dollar they are made up of inductions, elective sections or in association with other congenital issues that could explain a weakened or undeveloped immune system.

emphasis mine...

really?!?!? everyone med-minded often encourages exploring a c-section as a good option when a mom is GBS+
so- where/how would a c/s babe contract GBS? nosocomial?

 

[PeanutBean]

The research shows no difference in GBS infection rate between section and vaginal birth. Any health professional recommending it to reduce rusk is not doing so on the basis of any evidence. The reason I included it in my post is that from my research it is clear to me that the true risk factor is a less efficient immune system, as demonstrated by the 80% of infections in pre-term babies and from research demonstrating that premature babies have not yet developed a part of their immune system that fights against gbs. Therefore what I speculate is that babies who arrive before labour has been initiated by that baby could well also have not yet developed their full immunity and it would be very interesting go see how infection rates compare in babies where there has been a spontaneous term labour compared to an artificially induced one or section. It's not in any way a judgement of people who have an elective section but could be an additional risk factor if this is the case.

 

[Mervs Mum]

FirstLO is too strongly urge you to read this whole thread and the links. That's what my client did along with lots of other research and even before the negative late test she has decided that the potential benefits of IV ABs were not enough to risk a hospital birth and the potential risks to her and her babies longer term health. The fact she got the negative hasn't made any difference to the HCPs dealing with her. Remember that policies and protocols are made on a 'one size fits all' basis and we as individual must be responsible for deciding what this means to us. Informed choice.....god I'm like a broken record......

 

[7th_heaven]

Peanut I think that would be an awesome study!
I'd love to see the results of that one.
I bet alot of moms are induced so the whole show from start to finish is micromanaged so as to make sure that those doses are carefully administered.
When I say "med-minded" I meant my microbiology proffesor who also happens to be a lab supervisor(supervises 24 labs) at the CDC.

 

[PeanutBean]

I often wish I could see all the data about individuals in the existing studies. I feel so much must be in there that isn't necessarily studied. Another I'm wondering about at the moment I'd whether birth conditions have been correlated to SIDS at all, but that's for another thread!

The lack of change with section would suggest that infection occurs in utero rather than in exit. Based on the research in the first post that put mortality in a term baby as something like 1/100000 or whatever it was, I'm not sure the risk from a section wouldn't be much higher.