Annual report of the Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme, 2011

Authors

  • Monica M Lahra Department of Microbiology, SEALS, The Prince of Wales Hospital, Barker Street, RANDWICK NSW 2031
  • Rodney P Enriquez Department of Microbiology, SEALS, The Prince of Wales Hospital, Barker Street, RANDWICK NSW 2031

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33321/cdi.2012.36.19

Keywords:

antibiotic resistance, disease surveillance, meningococcal disease, Neisseria meningitidis

Abstract

In 2011, there were 241 laboratory-confirmed cases of invasive meningococcal disease (IMD) analysed by the National Neisseria Network, which represented 100% of cases notified to the National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System. One hundred and twenty-five isolates of Neisseria meningitidis from invasive cases of meningococcal disease were available for which the phenotypes (serogroup, serotype and serosubtype) and/or genotype and antibiotic susceptibility were determined. An additional 116 cases were confirmed by non-culture based methods (95 by nucleic acid amplification testing (NAAT) and 21 by serology), and where possible, serotyping was determined. Nationally, 179 (83.6%) laboratory-confirmed cases, where a serogroup was determined, were infected with serogroup B; 9 (4.2%) with serogroup C; 11 (5.2%) with serogroup W135 and 15 (7%) with serogroup Y meningococci. In 2011 there was a modest increase in the number of cases of IMD notified from that reported in 2010 (214). However, with the exception of 2010, this was the lowest number of laboratory confirmed IMD cases since surveillance data were recorded. Primary and secondary disease peaks were observed in those aged 4 years or less and in adolescents (15–19 years) and young adults respectively (20–24 years). There was also a disease peak observed in those aged 45–64 years. Serogroup B cases predominated in all age groups and jurisdictions. In 2011, the most common phenotype circulating in Australia was B:4:P1.7, corresponding to the porA genotype P1.7,2-4. Serogroup C cases were again numerically low, as were serogroups W135 and Y, however there was an increase in incidence of serogroup Y cases (7 in 2010, 15 in 2011). The proportion of isolates with decreased susceptibility to the penicillin group of antibiotics minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) (0.06 to 0.5 mg/L) was 84.6% and 1 isolate exhibited relative resistance to penicillin (MIC = 1.0 mg/L). All isolates remained susceptible to ceftriaxone and ciprofloxacin. One isolate had reduced susceptibility to rifampicin (MIC = 0.5 mg/L). Commun Dis Intell 2012;36(3):E251–E262.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

National Neisseria Network. Meningococcal Isolate Surveillance Australia, 1994. Commun Dis Intell 1995;19(12):286–289.

National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System. Number of notifications of Meningococcal disease (invasive), received from state and territory health authorities in the period of 1991 to 2011 and year-to-date notifications for 2012. Accessed on 14 June 2011. Available from: http://www9.health.gov.au/cda/source/Rpt_4.cfm

The Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme. Annual report of the Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme, 2009. Commun Dis Intell 2010;34(3):291–301.

Public Health Laboratory Network. Meningococcal laboratory case definition. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. 28 August 2006. Available from: http://www1.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/cda-phlncd-mening.htm

Tapsall J and members of the National Neisseria Network of Australia. Antimicrobial testing and applications in the pathogenic Neisseria. In: Merlino J, ed. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing: methods and practices with an Australian perspective. Australian Society for Microbiology, Sydney, 2004. pp 175–188.

Porritt RJ, Mercer JL, Munro R. Detection and serogroup determination of Neisseria meningitidis in CSF by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Pathology 2000;32(1):42–45.

Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme. Annual report of the Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme, 1999. Commun Dis Intell 2000;24(7):181–189.

Gray SJ, Borrow R, Kaczmarski EB. Meningococcal serology. In: Pollard AJ, Martin MCJ, eds. Meningococcal disease methods and protocols. Humana Press, Totawa, New Jersey, 2001 pp 61–87.

Robertson PW, Reinbott P, Duffy Y, Binotto E, Tapsall JW. Confirmation of invasive meningococcal disease by single point estimation of IgM antibody to outer membrane protein of Neisseria meningitidis. Pathology 2001;33(3):375–378.

Lahra MM, Robertson PW, Whybin R, Tapsall JW. Enhanced serological diagnosis of invasive meningococcal disease by determining anti-group C capsule IgM antibody by enzyme immunoassay. Pathology 2005;37(3):239–241.

Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme. Annual report of the Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme, 2002. Commun Dis Intell 2003;27(2):196–208.

Maiden MCJ, Ibarrz-Pavon AB, Urwin R, Gray SJ, Andrews NJ, Clarke SC, et al. Impact of meningococcal serogroup C conjugate vaccines on carriage and herd immunity. J Infect Dis 2008;197(5):737–743.

Shultz TR, Tapsall JW, White PA, Newton PJ. An invasive isolate of Neisseria meningitidis showing decreased susceptibility to quinolones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000;44(4):1116.

Singhal S, Purnapatre KP, Kalia V, Dube S, Nair D, Deb M, et al. Ciprofloxacin-resistant Neisseria meningitidis, Delhi, India. Emerg Infect Dis 2007;13(10):1614–1616.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Emergence of fluoroquinolone-resistant Neisseria meningitidis—Minnesota and North Dakota, 2007–2008. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2008;57(7):173–175

Shultz TR, White PA, Tapsall JW. An in-vitro assessment of the further potential for development of quinolone resistance in Neisseria meningiditis. Antimicrob Agent Chemother 2005;49(5):1753–1760.

Downloads

Published

01/09/12

How to Cite

Lahra, Monica M, and Rodney P Enriquez. 2012. “Annual Report of the Australian Meningococcal Surveillance Programme, 2011”. Communicable Diseases Intelligence 36 (September):251-62. https://doi.org/10.33321/cdi.2012.36.19.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>