-
Frontiers in Immunology 2020Chorioamnionitis (CA) is considered a key risk factor for very preterm birth and for developing early onset sepsis (EOS) in preterm infants, but recent data suggest that... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Chorioamnionitis (CA) is considered a key risk factor for very preterm birth and for developing early onset sepsis (EOS) in preterm infants, but recent data suggest that CA might be protective against late onset sepsis (LOS). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies exploring the association between CA and sepsis. A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE, from their inception to December 1, 2018. A random-effects model was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sources of heterogeneity were analyzed by subgroup and meta-regression analyses. The following categories of sepsis were analyzed: EOS, LOS, unspecified onset sepsis (UOS), culture-proven, and clinical sepsis. CA was subdivided into clinical and histological chorioamnionitis. Funisitis was also analyzed. We found 3,768 potentially relevant studies, of which 107 met the inclusion criteria (387,321 infants; 44,414 cases of CA). Meta-analysis showed an association between any CA and any EOS (OR 4.29, CI 3.63-5.06), any LOS (OR 1.29, CI 1.11-1.54), and any UOS (OR 1.59, CI 1.11-1.54). Subgroup analysis showed that CA was associated with culture-proven EOS (OR 4.69, CI 3.91-5.56), clinical EOS (OR 3.58, CI 1.90-6.76), and culture-proven LOS (OR 1.31, CI 1.12-1.53), but not with clinical LOS (OR 1.52, CI 0.78-2.96). The presence of funisitis did not increase the risk of either EOS or LOS when compared with CA without funisitis. CA-exposed infants had lower gestational age (-1.11 weeks, CI -1.37 to -0.84) than the infants not exposed to CA. Meta-regression analysis showed that the lower gestational age of the CA group correlated with the association between CA and LOS but not with the association between CA and EOS. In conclusion, our data suggest that the positive association between chorioamnionitis and LOS may be modulated by the effect of chorioamnionitis on gestational age.
Topics: Age Factors; Chorioamnionitis; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Infant, Premature; Neonatal Sepsis; Observational Studies as Topic; Pregnancy; Premature Birth; Prognosis; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors
PubMed: 32582153
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2020.00972 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2014The incidence of chorioamnionitis occurs in between eight and 12 women for every 1000 live births and 96% of cases of chorioamnionitis are due to ascending infection.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
The incidence of chorioamnionitis occurs in between eight and 12 women for every 1000 live births and 96% of cases of chorioamnionitis are due to ascending infection. Following spontaneous vaginal delivery, 1% to 4% of women develop postpartum endometritis. The incidence of neonatal sepsis is 0.5% to 1% of all infants born. Maternal vaginal bacteria are the main agents for these infections. It is reasonable to speculate that prevention of maternal and neonatal infections might be possible by washing the vagina and cervix with an antibacterial agent for all women during labour. Chlorhexidine belongs to the class of compounds known as the bis-biguanides. Chlorhexidine has antibacterial action against a wide range of aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, including those implicated in peripartal infections.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and side effects of chlorhexidine vaginal douching during labour in reducing maternal and neonatal infections (excluding group B streptococcal and HIV).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 June 2014), reference lists of retrieved reports and journal letters and editorials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized or quasi-randomized trials comparing chlorhexidine vaginal douching during labour with placebo or other vaginal disinfectant to prevent (reduce) maternal and neonatal infections (excluding group B streptococcal and HIV).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and quality, extracted and interpreted the data. A third review author analyzed and interpreted the data. The fourth author also interpreted the data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included three studies (3012 participants). There was no evidence of an effect of vaginal chlorhexidine during labour in preventing maternal and neonatal infections. Although the data suggest a trend in reducing postpartum endometritis, the difference was not statistically significant (three trials, 3012 women, risk ratio 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.13).Assessment of the quality of the evidence using GRADE indicated that the levels of evidence for all primary outcomes and one important secondary outcome were low to moderate.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is no evidence to support the use of vaginal chlorhexidine during labour in preventing maternal and neonatal infections. There is a need for a well-designed randomized controlled trial using appropriate concentration and volume of vaginal chlorhexidine irrigation solution and with adequate sample size.
Topics: Adult; Anti-Infective Agents, Local; Bacterial Infections; Chlorhexidine; Chorioamnionitis; Endometritis; Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Labor, Obstetric; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vaginal Douching
PubMed: 25218725
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004070.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2016Preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) complicates approximately 2% of pregnancies and can be either spontaneous or iatrogenic in nature. Complications of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Preterm prelabour rupture of the membranes (PPROM) complicates approximately 2% of pregnancies and can be either spontaneous or iatrogenic in nature. Complications of PPROM include prematurity, chorioamnionitis, neonatal sepsis, limb position defects, respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary hypoplasia chronic lung disease, periventricular leukomalacia and intraventricular haemorrhage.A number of different sealing techniques have been employed which aim to restore a physical barrier against infection and encourage the re-accumulation of amniotic fluid. Routine use of sealants is currently not recommended due to a lack of sufficient evidence to support the safety and effectiveness of such interventions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of sealing techniques following PPROM against each other, or versus standard care (including no sealant), on maternal and neonatal outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 May 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different techniques for sealing preterm prelabour ruptured membranes. Cluster-randomised trials and trials using a cross-over design were not eligible for inclusion in this review. We planned to include abstracts when sufficient information was provided.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and assessed trial quality. Two review authors independently extracted data. Data were checked for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
We included two studies (involving 141 women - with data from 124 women). We considered both studies as being at high risk of bias. Meta-analysis was not possible because the included studies examined different interventions (both in comparison with standard care) and reported on few, but different, outcomes. One study compared cervical adapter (mechanical sealing), and the other study examined an immunological membrane sealant. Neither of the included studies reported on this review's primary outcome of interest - perinatal mortality. Similarly, data were not reported for the majority of this review's secondary infant and maternal outcomes. Cervical adapter (mechanical sealing) versus standard care (one study, data from 35 participants)No data were reported for this review's primary outcome - perinatal mortality. Data were reported for few of this review's infant or maternal secondary outcomes.There was no clear difference between the mechanical sealing group and the standard care control in relation to the incidence of neonatal sepsis (risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 5.09 (very low-quality evidence)) or chorioamnionitis (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.28 to 5.09 (very low-quality evidence)). Oral immunological membrane sealant versus standard care (one study, data from 94 participants)No data were available for perinatal mortality (this review's primary outcome) or for the majority of this review's infant and maternal secondary outcomes. Compared to standard care, the immunological membrane sealant was associated with a reduction in preterm birth less than 37 weeks (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.68 (very low-quality evidence)) and a reduction in neonatal death (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.75 (very low-quality evidence)). However, there was no clear difference between groups in terms of neonatal sepsis (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.46 (very low-quality evidence)) or respiratory distress syndrome (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.46 (very low-quality evidence)).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is insufficient evidence to evaluate sealing procedures for PPROM. There were no data relating to this review's primary outcome (perinatal mortality) and the majority of our infant and maternal secondary outcomes were not reported in the two included studies.There was limited evidence to suggest that an immunological membrane sealant was associated with a reduction in preterm birth at less than 37 weeks and neonatal death, but these results should be interpreted with caution as this is based on one small study, with a high risk of bias, and the intervention has not been tested in other studies.Although midtrimester PPROM is not a rare occurrence, there are only a small amount of published data addressing the benefits and risks of sealing procedures. Most of these studies are retrospective and cohort based and could therefore not be included in our data-analysis.This review highlights the paucity of prospective randomised trials in this area. Current evidence provides limited information both on effectiveness and safety for the interventions described. Given the paucity of high-quality data, we recommend that future research efforts focus on the conduct of randomised trials assessing the effect of promising interventions that have been only evaluated to date in cohort studies (e.g. amniopatch). Future trials should address outcomes including perinatal mortality, preterm birth, neonatal death, respiratory distress syndrome, neonatal sepsis and developmental delay. They should also evaluate maternal outcomes including sepsis, mode of delivery, length of hospital stay and emotional well-being.
Topics: Equipment Design; Female; Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture; Humans; Immunologic Factors; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Obstetric Labor, Premature; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 27384151
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010218.pub2 -
BioMed Research International 2021Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common bacterial infections during pregnancy. It is associated with different maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes such as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the most common bacterial infections during pregnancy. It is associated with different maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes such as low birth weight, preterm birth, still birth, preeclampsia, maternal anemia, sepsis, and amnionitis, even when the infection is asymptomatic. However, in Ethiopia, it is represented with fragmented and inconclusive pocket studies. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis is aimed at estimating the pooled prevalence of UTI and its associated factors among pregnant women in Ethiopia.
METHODS
PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and local sources were used to access eligible studies. Joanna Briggs Institute Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument was applied for critical appraisal. Heterogeneity and publication bias were evaluated using statistic, funnel plot asymmetry, and Egger's tests. Random effect model was employed to estimate the pooled burden of UTI and its associated factors among pregnant women with its corresponding odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULT
From all systematically searched articles, 14 studies were eligible for this analysis. The overall pooled prevalence of UTI among pregnant women in Ethiopia was 15.37% (95% CI: 12.54, 18.19). Family monthly income (OR = 3.8 and 95% CI: 1.29, 11.23), parity (OR = 1.59 and 95% CI: 1.01, 2.50), history of catheterization (OR = 2.76 and 95% CI: 1.31, 5.84), and history of UTI (OR = 3.12 and 95% CI: 1.74, 5.60) were factors significantly associated with UTI among pregnant women in Ethiopia.
CONCLUSION
The overall pooled estimate of UTI among pregnant women in Ethiopia was higher compared with CDC estimation which was 8%. Family monthly income < 1000ETB, multipara, previous history of catheterization, and history of UTI were factors increased burden of UTI during pregnancy. So, strategies targeting in economic reforms, universal access of family planning, and standardized prenatal care service should be addressed to alleviate this high prevalence of UTI during pregnancy.
Topics: Ethiopia; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnant Women; Prevalence; Urinary Tract Infections
PubMed: 34901276
DOI: 10.1155/2021/6551526 -
Cureus Jul 2022Diabetes is a leading chronic illness in the modern world and 19-34% develop chronic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in their lifetime, often necessitating amputation. The... (Review)
Review
Diabetes is a leading chronic illness in the modern world and 19-34% develop chronic diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) in their lifetime, often necessitating amputation. The reduction in tissue growth factors and resulting imbalance between proteolytic enzymes and their inhibitors, along with systemic factors impairing healing appear particularly important in chronic wounds. Growth factors applied topically have thus been suggested to be a non-invasive, safe, and cost-effective adjunct to improve wound healing and prevent complications. Comprehensive database searches of MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov were performed to identify clinical evidence and ongoing trials. The risk of bias analysis included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. We included randomized controlled trials that compared the use of a topical biologic growth factor-containing regimen to any other regimen. Primary outcomes of interest were time to wound closure, healing rate, and time. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of adverse events such as infection. A total of 41 trials from 1992-2020 were included in this review, with a total recorded 3,112 patients. Platelet-derived growth factors (PDGF) in the form of becaplermin gel are likely to reduce the time of closure, increase the incidence of wound closure, and complete wound healing. Human umbilical cord-related treatments, dehydrated human amnion and chorion allograft (dHACA), and hypothermically stored amniotic membrane (HSAM), consistently increased the rates and incidence of complete ulcer healing while reducing ulcer size and time to complete ulcer healing. Fibroblast growth factor-1 (FGF1) showed only a slight benefit in multiple studies regarding increasing complete ulcer healing rates and incidence while reducing ulcer size and time to complete ulcer healing, with a few studies showing no statistical difference from placebo. Platelet-rich fibrin (PRF) is consistent in reducing the time to complete ulcer healing and increasing wound healing rate but may not reduce ulcer size or increase the incidence of complete ulcer healing. Targeting the wound healing pathway via the extrinsic administration of growth factors is a promising option to augment wound healing in diabetic patients. Growth factors have also shown promise in specific subgroups of patients who are at risk of significantly impaired wound healing such as those with a history of secondary infection and vasculopathy. As diabetes impairs multiple stages of wound healing, combining growth factors in diabetic wound care may prove to be an area of interest. Evidence from this systematic literature review suggests that topical adjuncts probably reduce time to wound closure, reduce healing time, and increase the healing rate in patients with chronic DFUs.
PubMed: 36035037
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.27180 -
Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology :... Aug 2016To assess and compare the rate of procedure-related complications after intrauterine treatment of spina bifida by endoscopic surgery and by open fetal surgery. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Procedure-related complications of open vs endoscopic fetal surgery for treatment of spina bifida in an era of intrauterine myelomeningocele repair: systematic review and meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To assess and compare the rate of procedure-related complications after intrauterine treatment of spina bifida by endoscopic surgery and by open fetal surgery.
METHODS
Systematic literature searches in PubMed and SCOPUS databases were performed on 20 September 2015 to identify randomized controlled trials and observational studies on treatment of human spina bifida by endoscopic or open fetal surgery techniques. Only studies with ≥ 10 cases that were published in or after 2000 were included in the meta-analysis in order to reduce the risk of bias. Primary outcomes (complete dehiscence, focal dehiscence and/or markedly thin hysterotomy scar; preterm delivery < 34 weeks; mean gestational age at delivery) and secondary outcomes (oligohydramnios, prelabor rupture of membranes, placental abruption, chorioamnionitis and perinatal death) were assessed for both techniques. Precision of the estimated proportions was evaluated with 95% CIs. Inconsistency was assessed using the I(2) statistic.
RESULTS
The search identified 1080 records that were examined based on title and abstract, of which 28 full-text articles were examined completely for eligibility. Nine records were excluded because cases were also described in other studies, leaving 19 records for analysis. When comparing endoscopic vs open fetal surgery, the rate of complete dehiscence, focal dehiscence and/or markedly thin hysterotomy scar was, respectively, 1% (95% CI, 0-4%) vs 26% (95% CI, 12-42%); preterm delivery < 34 weeks was 80% (95% CI, 41-100%) vs 45% (95% CI, 38-53%); oligohydramnios was 39% (95% CI, 9-75%) vs 14% (95% CI, 7-24%); prelabor rupture of membranes was 67% (95% CI, 12-100%) vs 38% (95% CI, 26-50%); and perinatal death was 14% (95% CI, 1-38%) vs 5% (95% CI, 3-8%).
CONCLUSION
Open fetal surgery for spina bifida seems to show lower rates of procedure-related complications than does endoscopic surgery, but the rate of hysterotomy scar complications is high after open surgery. Because of the low quality of evidence, the conclusions should be interpreted with caution. Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Topics: Female; Fetoscopy; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Meningomyelocele; Observational Studies as Topic; Postoperative Complications; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Spinal Dysraphism; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 26612040
DOI: 10.1002/uog.15830 -
PloS One 2024Worldwide, surgery related deaths within 30 days of the procedure accounts the third contributor among all causes of deaths, with an estimated 4.2 million people... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Worldwide, surgery related deaths within 30 days of the procedure accounts the third contributor among all causes of deaths, with an estimated 4.2 million people annually and half of these deaths occur in low and middle income countries.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the pooled prevalence of surgical site infection following cesarean section and its predictors in Ethiopia.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by using PRISMA guideline. An appropriate and comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Google Scholar, HINARI and Scopus was done. This SRMA included all articles conducted in all regional state of Ethiopia reporting the prevalence/proportion/incidence of SSI after cesarean section and/or associated factors. All observational study designs were included in this SRMA. Articles which lack our outcome of interest: SSI following cesarean section and its predictors were excluded from this SRMA. The I2 statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity across studies. Funnel plot asymmetry and Egger's tests were used to check for publication bias. A random effect model was used to estimate the pooled prevalence of SSI. Adjusted Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (CI) was also considered to determine the association of identified variables with SSI. Statistical analysis was conducted using STATA version 17 software.
RESULT
Initially 6334 studies were identified and finally 19 studies were found eligible for the analysis. Studies with a score of 7 and above were included for the final systematic review and meta-analysis. The review was comprised of 14 cross sectional studies, 4 cohort and one case control studies. The pooled estimate of SSI in Ethiopia was 11.13% (95%CI, 9.29-12.97%). Prolonged labor (AOR = 3.16, 95% CI; (2.14-4.68)), chorioamnionitis (AOR = 4.26, 95% CI; (1.99-8.91)), prolonged PROM (AOR = 3.80, 95% CI; (2.51-5.62)), repeated vaginal examination (AOR = 3.80, 95% CI; (2.45-5.88)), decreased hemoglobin level (AOR = 4.57, 95%CI; (3.16-6.60)), vertical skin incision (AOR = 3.09, 95% CI; (2.04-4.67)) and general anesthesia (AOR = 1.82, 95% CI (1.21-2.75)) are significantly associated with SSI after cesarean section in Ethiopia.
CONCLUSION
SSI after cesarean section in Ethiopia is high. Prolonged labor, chorioamnionits, prolonged PROM, repeated vaginal examination, decreased Hgb level, vertical skin incision and general anesthesia were positively associated. Thus, evidence based intra-partum care should be practiced.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Surgical Wound Infection; Risk Factors; Ethiopia; Cross-Sectional Studies; Cesarean Section; Prevalence; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 38512861
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296767 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Oct 2014Prelabour rupture of the membranes (PROM) at or near term (defined in this review as 36 weeks' gestation or beyond) increases the risk of infection for the woman and her... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Prelabour rupture of the membranes (PROM) at or near term (defined in this review as 36 weeks' gestation or beyond) increases the risk of infection for the woman and her baby. The routine use of antibiotics for women at the time of term PROM may reduce this risk. However, due to increasing problems with bacterial resistance and the risk of maternal anaphylaxis with antibiotic use, it is important to assess the evidence addressing risks and benefits in order to ensure judicious use of antibiotics. This review was undertaken to assess the balance of risks and benefits to the mother and infant of antibiotic prophylaxis for PROM at or near term.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antibiotics administered prophylactically to women with PROM at 36 weeks' gestation or beyond, on maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 July 2014).
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised trials that compared outcomes for women and infants when antibiotics were administered prophylactically for prelabour rupture of the membranes at or near term, with outcomes for controls (placebo or no antibiotic).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted the data and assessed risk of bias in the included studies. Additional data were received from the investigators of included studies.
MAIN RESULTS
This update includes an additional two studies involving 1801 women, giving a total of four included studies of 2639 women. Whereas the previous version of this review showed a statistically significant reduction in endometritis with the use of antibiotics, no such effect was shown in this update (average risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.05 to 2.31). No differences were shown on the primary outcome measures of probable early-onset neonatal sepsis (average RR 0.69, 95%; CI 0.21 to 2.33); definite early-onset neonatal sepsis (average RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.08 to 4.26); maternal infectious morbidity (chorioamnionitis and/or endometritis) (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.15); stillbirth (RR 3.00, 95% CI 0.61 to 14.82); and perinatal mortality (RR 1.98, 95% CI 0.60 to 6.55), though the number of cases in the control group for these outcomes was low. There were no cases of neonatal mortality or serious maternal outcome in the studies assessed. Caesarean section was increased with the use of antibiotics (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.61) as was duration of maternal stay in hospital (mean difference (MD) 0.06 days, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.11), largely owing to one study of 1640 women where repeat caesarean section, increased baseline hypertension and pre-eclampsia were evident in the antibiotic group, despite random allocation and allocation concealment.Subgroup analyses by timing of induction (early induction versus late induction) showed no difference in either probable or definite early-onset neonatal sepsis in the early induction group (RR 1.47, 95% CI 0.80 to 2.70 and RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.48 to 3.44, respectively) or the late induction group (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.13 and RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.34, respectively), although there were trends toward reduced probable and definite early-onset neonatal sepsis in the late induction group. A test for subgroup differences confirmed a differential effect of the intervention on probable early-onset neonatal sepsis between the subgroups (Chi² = 4.50, df = 1 (P = 0.03), I² = 77.8%). No difference in maternal infectious morbidity (chorioamnionitis and/or endometritis) was found in either subgroup, though again there was a trend towards reduced maternal infectious morbidly in the late induction group (average RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.47). No differences were shown in stillbirth or perinatal mortality. The quality of the evidence for the primary outcomes using GRADE was judged to be low to very low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This updated review demonstrates no convincing evidence of benefit for mothers or neonates from the routine use of antibiotics for PROM at or near term. We are unable to adequately assess the risk of short- and long-term harms from the use of antibiotics due to the unavailability of data. Given the unmeasured potential adverse effects of antibiotic use, the potential for the development of resistant organisms, and the low risk of maternal infection in the control group, the routine use of antibiotics for PROM at or near term in the absence of confirmed maternal infection should be avoided.
Topics: Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Bacterial Infections; Chorioamnionitis; Endometritis; Female; Fetal Membranes, Premature Rupture; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Risk Assessment; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 25352443
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001807.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2015Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Midwives are primary providers of care for childbearing women around the world. However, there is a lack of synthesised information to establish whether there are differences in morbidity and mortality, effectiveness and psychosocial outcomes between midwife-led continuity models and other models of care.
OBJECTIVES
To compare midwife-led continuity models of care with other models of care for childbearing women and their infants.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All published and unpublished trials in which pregnant women are randomly allocated to midwife-led continuity models of care or other models of care during pregnancy and birth.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 15 trials involving 17,674 women. We assessed the quality of the trial evidence for all primary outcomes (i.e., regional analgesia (epidural/spinal), caesarean birth, instrumental vaginal birth (forceps/vacuum), spontaneous vaginal birth, intact perineum, preterm birth (less than 37 weeks) and overall fetal loss and neonatal death (fetal loss was assessed by gestation using 24 weeks as the cut-off for viability in many countries) using the GRADE methodology: All primary outcomes were graded as of high quality.For the primary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience regional analgesia (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14; high quality), instrumental vaginal birth (average RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.97; participants = 17,501; studies = 13; high quality), preterm birth less than 37 weeks (average RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; participants = 13,238; studies = 8; high quality) and less overall fetal/neonatal death (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; participants = 17,561; studies = 13; high quality evidence). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.07; participants = 16,687; studies = 12; high quality). There were no differences between groups for caesarean births or intact perineum.For the secondary outcomes, women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience amniotomy (average RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.98; participants = 3253; studies = 4), episiotomy (average RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.92; participants = 17,674; studies = 14) and fetal loss/neonatal death before 24 weeks (average RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.98; participants = 15,645; studies = 11). Women who had midwife-led continuity models of care were more likely to experience no intrapartum analgesia/anaesthesia (average RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.37; participants = 10,499; studies = 7), have a longer mean length of labour (hours) (mean difference (MD) 0.50, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74; participants = 3328; studies = 3) and more likely to be attended at birth by a known midwife (average RR 7.04, 95% CI 4.48 to 11.08; participants = 6917; studies = 7). There were no differences between groups for fetal loss or neonatal death more than or equal to 24 weeks, induction of labour, antenatal hospitalisation, antepartum haemorrhage, augmentation/artificial oxytocin during labour, opiate analgesia, perineal laceration requiring suturing, postpartum haemorrhage, breastfeeding initiation, low birthweight infant, five-minute Apgar score less than or equal to seven, neonatal convulsions, admission of infant to special care or neonatal intensive care unit(s) or in mean length of neonatal hospital stay (days).Due to a lack of consistency in measuring women's satisfaction and assessing the cost of various maternity models, these outcomes were reported narratively. The majority of included studies reported a higher rate of maternal satisfaction in midwife-led continuity models of care. Similarly, there was a trend towards a cost-saving effect for midwife-led continuity care compared to other care models.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review suggests that women who received midwife-led continuity models of care were less likely to experience intervention and more likely to be satisfied with their care with at least comparable adverse outcomes for women or their infants than women who received other models of care.Further research is needed to explore findings of fewer preterm births and fewer fetal deaths less than 24 weeks, and overall fetal loss/neonatal death associated with midwife-led continuity models of care.
Topics: Amnion; Analgesia, Obstetrical; Cesarean Section; Continuity of Patient Care; Episiotomy; Female; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Midwifery; Models, Organizational; Patient Satisfaction; Perinatal Care; Postnatal Care; Pregnancy; Prenatal Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 26370160
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004667.pub4 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2014Chorioamnionitis is a common infection that affects both mother and infant. Infant complications associated with chorioamnionitis include early neonatal sepsis,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chorioamnionitis is a common infection that affects both mother and infant. Infant complications associated with chorioamnionitis include early neonatal sepsis, pneumonia, and meningitis. Chorioamnionitis can also result in maternal morbidity such as pelvic infection and septic shock.Clinical chorioamnionitis is estimated to occur in 1% to 2% of term births and in 5% to 10% of preterm births; histologic chorioamnionitis is found in nearly 20% of term births and in 50% of preterm births. Women with chorioamnionitis have a two to three times higher risk for cesarean delivery and a three to four times greater risk for endomyometritis, wound infection, pelvic abscess, bacteremia, and postpartum hemorrhage.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of administering antibiotic regimens for intra-amniotic infection on maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality and on infection-related complications.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (1 October 2014), CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, and the WHO ICTRP (September 2014). We also searched reference lists of retrieved studies and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included women who experienced intra-amniotic infection. Trials were included if they compared antibiotic treatment with placebo or no treatment (if applicable), treatment with different antibiotic regimens, or timing of antibiotic therapy (intrapartum and/or postpartum). Therefore, this review assesses trials evaluating intrapartum antibiotics, intrapartum and postpartum antibiotic regimens, and postpartum antibiotics. Diagnosis of intra-amniotic infection was based on standard criteria (clinical/test), and no limit was placed on gestational age.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and trial quality. Two review authors independently extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and included a 'Summary of findings' table.
MAIN RESULTS
Our prespecified primary outcomes were maternal and neonatal mortality, maternal and neonatal severe infection, and duration of maternal and neonatal hospital stay.We included 11 studies (involving 1296 women) and assessed them as having low to moderate risk of bias - mainly because allocation concealment methods were not adequately reported, most studies were open, and outcome reporting was incomplete. The quality of the evidence was low to very low for most outcomes, as per the GRADE approach. The following antibiotics were assessed in the included trials: ampicillin, ampicillin/sulbactam, gentamicin, clindamycin, and cefotetan. During labor: meta-analysis of two studies found no clear differences in rates of neonatal sepsis (163 neonates; risk ratio (RR) 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 2.86; I² = 9%; low quality of evidence), treatment failure (endometritis) (163 participants; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.70; I² = 0%; low quality of evidence), and postpartum hemorrhage (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.76 to 2.56; I² = 0%; low quality of evidence) when two different dosages/regimens of gentamicin were assessed. No clear differences between groups were found for any reported maternal or neonatal outcomes. The review did not identify data for a comparison of antibiotics versus no treatment/placebo. Postpartum: meta-analysis of two studies that evaluated use of antibiotics versus placebo after vaginal delivery showed no significant differences between groups in rates of treatment failure or postpartum endometritis. No significant differences were found in rates of neonatal death and postpartum endometritis when use of antibiotics was compared with no treatment. Four trials assessing two different dosages/regimens of gentamicin or dual-agent therapy versus triple-agent therapy, or comparing antibiotics, found no significant differences in most reported neonatal or maternal outcomes; the duration of hospital stay showed a difference in favor of the group of women who received short-duration antibiotics (one study, 292 women; mean difference (MD) -0.90 days, 95% CI -1.64 to -0.16; moderate quality of evidence). Intrapartum versus postpartum: one small study (45 women) evaluating use of ampicillin/gentamicin during intrapartum versus immediate postpartum treatment found significant differences favoring the intrapartum group in the mean number of days of maternal postpartum hospital stay (one trial, 45 women; MD -1.00 days, 95% CI -1.94 to - 0.06; very low quality of evidence) and the mean number of neonatal hospital stay days (one trial, 45 neonates; MD -1.90 days, 95% CI -3.91 to -0.49; very low quality of evidence). Although no significant differences were found in the rate of maternal bacteremia or early neonatal sepsis, for the outcome of neonatal pneumonia or sepsis we observed a significant difference favoring intrapartum treatment (one trial, 45 neonates; RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.95; very low quality of evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review included 11 studies (having low to moderate risk of bias). The quality of the evidence was low to very low for most outcomes, as per the GRADE approach. Only one outcome (duration of hospital stay) was considered to provide moderate quality of evidence when antibiotics (short duration) were compared with antibiotics (long duration) during postpartum management of intra-amniotic infection. Our main reasons for downgrading the quality of evidence were limitations in study design or execution (risk of bias), imprecision, and inconsistency of results.Currently, limited evidence is available to reveal the most appropriate antimicrobial regimen for the treatment of patients with intra-amniotic infection; whether antibiotics should be continued during the postpartum period; and which antibiotic regimen or what treatment duration should be used. Also, no evidence was found on adverse effects of the intervention (not reported in any of the included studies). One small RCT showed that use of antibiotics during the intrapartum period is superior to their use during the postpartum period in reducing the number of days of maternal and neonatal hospital stay.
Topics: Amnion; Ampicillin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cefotetan; Chorioamnionitis; Clindamycin; Delivery, Obstetric; Drug Administration Schedule; Endometritis; Female; Fetal Diseases; Gentamicins; Humans; Postpartum Period; Pregnancy; Sepsis; Sulbactam
PubMed: 25526426
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010976.pub2