BACKGROUND: Neisseria gonorrhoeae culture is required for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, but recovering isolates from clinical specimens is challenging. Although many variables influence culture recovery, studies evaluating the impact of culture specimen collection timing and patient symptom status are limited. This study analyzed urogenital and extragenital culture recovery data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Strengthening the US Response to Resistant Gonorrhea (SURRG) program, a multisite project, which enhances local N. gonorrhoeae culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing capacity. METHODS: Eight SURRG jurisdictions collected gonococcal cultures from patients with N. gonorrhoeae-positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results attending sexually transmitted disease and community clinics. Matched NAAT and culture specimens from the same anatomic site were collected, and culture recovery was assessed. Time between NAAT and culture specimen collection was categorized as same day, 1 to 7 days, 8 to 14 days, or ≥15 days, and patient symptoms were matched to the anatomic site where culture specimens were collected. RESULTS: From 2018 to 2019, among persons with N. gonorrhoeae-positive NAAT, urethral infections resulted in the highest culture recovery (5927 of 6515 [91.0%]), followed by endocervical (222 of 363 [61.2%]), vaginal (63 of 133 [47.4%]), rectal (1117 of 2805 [39.8%]), and pharyngeal (1019 of 3678 [27.7%]) infections. Culture recovery was highest when specimens were collected on the same day as NAAT specimens and significantly decreased after 7 days. Symptoms were significantly associated with culture recovery at urethral (P = <0.0001) and rectal (P = <0.0001) sites of infection but not endocervical, vaginal, or pharyngeal sites. CONCLUSIONS: Culture specimen collection timing and patient symptomatic status can impact culture recovery. These findings can guide decisions about culture collection protocols to maximize culture recovery and strengthen detection of antimicrobial-resistant infections.
BACKGROUND: Neisseria gonorrhoeae culture is required for antimicrobial susceptibility testing, but recovering isolates from clinical specimens is challenging. Although many variables influence culture recovery, studies evaluating the impact of culture specimen collection timing and patient symptom status are limited. This study analyzed urogenital and extragenital culture recovery data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Strengthening the US Response to Resistant Gonorrhea (SURRG) program, a multisite project, which enhances local N. gonorrhoeae culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing capacity. METHODS: Eight SURRG jurisdictions collected gonococcal cultures from patients with N. gonorrhoeae-positive nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results attending sexually transmitted disease and community clinics. Matched NAAT and culture specimens from the same anatomic site were collected, and culture recovery was assessed. Time between NAAT and culture specimen collection was categorized as same day, 1 to 7 days, 8 to 14 days, or ≥15 days, and patient symptoms were matched to the anatomic site where culture specimens were collected. RESULTS: From 2018 to 2019, among persons with N. gonorrhoeae-positive NAAT, urethral infections resulted in the highest culture recovery (5927 of 6515 [91.0%]), followed by endocervical (222 of 363 [61.2%]), vaginal (63 of 133 [47.4%]), rectal (1117 of 2805 [39.8%]), and pharyngeal (1019 of 3678 [27.7%]) infections. Culture recovery was highest when specimens were collected on the same day as NAAT specimens and significantly decreased after 7 days. Symptoms were significantly associated with culture recovery at urethral (P = <0.0001) and rectal (P = <0.0001) sites of infection but not endocervical, vaginal, or pharyngeal sites. CONCLUSIONS: Culture specimen collection timing and patient symptomatic status can impact culture recovery. These findings can guide decisions about culture collection protocols to maximize culture recovery and strengthen detection of antimicrobial-resistant infections.
Authors: Carolien M Wind; Henry J C de Vries; Maarten F Schim van der Loeff; Magnus Unemo; Alje P van Dam Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-04-01 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Robert D Kirkcaldy; Alesia Harvey; John R Papp; Carlos Del Rio; Olusegun O Soge; King K Holmes; Edward W Hook; Grace Kubin; Stefan Riedel; Jonathan Zenilman; Kevin Pettus; Tremeka Sanders; Samera Sharpe; Elizabeth Torrone Journal: MMWR Surveill Summ Date: 2016-07-15
Authors: D H Martin; C Cammarata; B Van Der Pol; R B Jones; T C Quinn; C A Gaydos; K Crotchfelt; J Schachter; J Moncada; D Jungkind; B Turner; C Peyton Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2000-10 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Laura H Bachmann; Robert E Johnson; Hong Cheng; Lauri E Markowitz; John R Papp; Edward W Hook Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2009-02-04 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Sarah B Doernberg; Lauren Komarow; Thuy Tien T Tran; Zoe Sund; Mark W Pandori; David Jensen; Ephraim L Tsalik; Carolyn D Deal; Henry F Chambers; Vance G Fowler; Scott R Evans; Robin Patel; Jeffrey D Klausner Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2020-12-03 Impact factor: 20.999
Authors: Lindley A Barbee; Olusegun O Soge; Christine M Khosropour; Angela LeClair; Matthew R Golden Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2022-05-05 Impact factor: 11.677