National Rapid Genome Sequencing in Neonatal Intensive Care.

Importance: National implementation of rapid trio genome sequencing (rtGS) in a clinical acute setting is essential to ensure advanced and equitable care for ill neonates. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility, diagnostic efficacy, and clinical utility of rtGS in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) throughout Israel. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective, public health care-based, multicenter cohort study was conducted from October 2021 to December 2022 with the Community Genetics Department of the Israeli Ministry of Health and all Israeli medical genetics institutes (n = 18) and NICUs (n = 25). Critically ill neonates suspected of having a genetic etiology were offered rtGS. All sequencing, analysis, and interpretation of data were performed in a central genomics center at Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center. Rapid results were expected within 10 days. A secondary analysis report, issued within 60 days, focused mainly on cases with negative rapid results and actionable secondary findings. Pathogenic, likely pathogenic, and highly suspected variants of unknown significance (VUS) were reported. Main Outcomes and Measures: Diagnostic rate, including highly suspected disease-causing VUS, and turnaround time for rapid results. Clinical utility was assessed via questionnaires circulated to treating neonatologists. Results: A total of 130 neonates across Israel (70 [54%] male; 60 [46%] female) met inclusion criteria and were recruited. Mean (SD) age at enrollment was 12 (13) days. Mean (SD) turnaround time for rapid report was 7 (3) days. Diagnostic efficacy was 50% (65 of 130) for disease-causing variants, 11% (14 of 130) for VUS suspected to be causative, and 1 novel gene candidate (1%). Disease-causing variants included 12 chromosomal and 52 monogenic disorders as well as 1 neonate with uniparental disomy. Overall, the response rate for clinical utility questionnaires was 82% (107 of 130). Among respondents, genomic testing led to a change in medical management for 24 neonates (22%). Results led to immediate precision medicine for 6 of 65 diagnosed infants (9%), an additional 2 (3%) received palliative care, and 2 (3%) were transferred to nursing homes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this national cohort study, rtGS in critically ill neonates was feasible and diagnostically beneficial in a public health care setting. This study is a prerequisite for implementation of rtGS for ill neonates into routine care and may aid in design of similar studies in other public health care systems.

Antepartum Membrane Stripping in GBS Carriers, Is It Safe? (The STRIP-G Study).

OBJECTIVE: Stripping of the membranes is an established and widely utilized obstetric procedure associated with higher spontaneous vaginal delivery rates, reduced need for formal induction of labor and a lower likelihood of post-term pregnancy. Due to the theoretical concern of bacterial seeding during the procedure many practitioners choose not to sweep the membranes in Group B Streptococcus (GBS) colonized patients. We conducted 'the STRIP-G study' in order to determine whether maternal and neonatal outcomes are affected by GBS carrier status in women undergoing membrane stripping. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a prospective study in a tertiary referral center, comparing maternal and neonatal outcomes following membrane stripping among GBS-positive, GBS-negative, and GBS-unknown patients. We compared the incidence of composite adverse neonatal outcomes (primary outcome) among the three study groups, while secondary outcome measure was composite adverse maternal outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 542 women were included in the study, of which 135 were GBS-positive, 361 GBS-negative, and 46 GBS-unknown status. Demographic, obstetric, and intra-partum characteristics were similar for all groups. Adverse neonatal outcomes were observed in 8 (5.9%), 31 (8.6%), and 2 (4.3%) in the GBS-positive, GBS-negative, and unknown groups, respectively (P = 0.530), (Odds Ratio between GBS-Positive vs. GBS-Negative groups 0.67 (95%, CI = 0.30-1.50)); while composite adverse maternal outcomes occurred in 9 (6.66%), 31 (8.59%), and 5 (10.87%) in the GBS-positive, GBS-negative, and unknown groups, respectively (P = 0.617). CONCLUSIONS: Antepartum membrane stripping in GBS carriers appears to be a safe obstetrical procedure that does not adversely affect maternal or neonatal outcomes.