1. Alain S. 1, Boyer B 1, Lamblot T 2, Alcolea S 3, and Leruez-Ville M 2 for the Congenital Cytomegalovirus network* 1)National Reference Center for Cytomegaloviruses, CHU Limoges, Limoges, France 2) National Reference Center for Cytomegaloviruses associated laboratory, CHU Necker-Enfants malades, Paris, France 3) Clinical Investigation Center CIC-P, CHU Limoges, France sophie.alain@unilim.fr CONGENITAL CMV SURVEY IN FRANCE FIRST RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Introduction In the absence of CMV screening, collecting data about the real burden of congenital cytomegalovirus infection in France remains difficult. A first retrospective 3 months survey underlined the low rate of cases declaration (Parent-du Chatelet BEH 2008). As a reference center we collected cases from 23 virological laboratories of 15 French regions agreed for antenatal diagnosis, to cover all the territory. We present herein the first results of this survey (2006-2009). Laboratories participating in a prenatal diagnosis structure were asked by the Reference Center for systematic declaration of cases of CMV infection during pregnancy. They were recalled each year for this declaration and for sending strains or samples to their referent laboratory (Necker-Enfants malades for the north of France and Limoges for the South of France) Case definition: congenital infection diagnosed by either amniotic fluid PCR or culture during pregnancy or viruria at birth. Classification of cases: cases were classified on the basis of symptoms detected either by sonographic examination or at birth. Severe : neurologic abnormalities Mild : extra-neurologic symptoms Asymptomatic : absence of sonographic or clinical symptoms Not documented Moment of contamination and pregnancy issues were also collected. Genotyping of HCMV strains: gB genotypes and presence of mixed populations were studied from clinical samples or isolates either by gB CLZ region sequencing (Picone et al., Prenat. Diagn., 2004) or by direct genotyping of AD2 and CLZ encoding regions using PCR-RFLP and capillary electrophoresis (Grosjean et al., j Clin Virol. 2009). Results Collecting data on congenital infectionat the national level is a real challenge, that encounters several difficulties, the first one being the absence of systematic prospective declaration of cases to the reference center, as it exists for measles or rubella. This will represent the next step of our effort in follow-up of congenital infection in France. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS : To all the members of the network, virologists and technicians (listed below) and to the clinicians.To the InVS for financial suport. Conclusion Material and methods Genotyping : 64 strains were classified in : No mixed population was detected Increase of declared cases due to the progressive organization of the network though the percentage of not documente cases is still relatively high. Number of cases collected between 2006 and 2009 227 from 20 laboratories North France : 140 South France : 105 Case severity : Global: For each laboratory (between 2007 and 2009 only) : 78 14 8 10 5 15 8 2 N=46 5 7 10 15 9 10 3 5