Antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery

Antibiotic Prescribing to Patients with Infectious and Non-Infectious Indications Admitted to Obstetrics and Gynaecology Departments in Two Tertiary Care Hospitals in Central India

Background: Patients admitted to obstetrics and gynaecology (OBGY) departments are at high risk of infections and subsequent antibiotic prescribing, which may contribute to antibiotic resistance (ABR). Although antibiotic surveillance is one of the cornerstones to combat ABR, it is rarely performed in low- and middle-income countries. Aim: To describe and compare antibiotic prescription patterns among the inpatients in OBGY departments of two tertiary care hospitals, one teaching (TH) and one nonteaching (NTH), in Central India. Methods: Data on patients' demographics, diagnoses and prescribed antibiotics were collected prospectively for three years. Patients were divided into two categories- infectious and non-infectious diagnosis and were further divided into three groups: surgical, nonsurgical and possible-surgical indications. The data was coded based on the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system, and the International Classification of Disease system version-10 and Defined Daily Doses (DDDs) were calculated per 1000 patients. Results: In total, 5558 patients were included in the study, of those, 81% in the TH and 85% in the NTH received antibiotics (p < 0.001). Antibiotics were prescribed frequently to the inpatients in the nonsurgical group without any documented bacterial infection (TH-71%; NTH-75%). Prescribing of broad-spectrum, fixed-dose combinations (FDCs) of antibiotics was more common in both categories in the NTH than in the TH. Overall, higher DDD/1000 patients were prescribed in the TH in both categories. Conclusions: Antibiotics were frequently prescribed to the patients with no documented infectious indications. Misprescribing of the broad-spectrum FDCs of antibiotics and unindicated prescribing of antibiotics point towards threat of ABR and needs urgent action. Antibiotics prescribed to the inpatients having nonbacterial infection indications is another point of concern that requires action. Investigation of underlying reasons for prescribing antibiotics for unindicated diagnoses and the development and implementation of antibiotic stewardship programs are recommended measures to improve antibiotic prescribing practice.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery

BACKGROUND

Vacuum and forceps assisted vaginal deliveries are reported to increase the incidence of postpartum infections and maternal readmission to hospital compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery. Prophylactic antibiotics may be prescribed to prevent these infections. However, the benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal deliveries is still unclear. This is an update of a review last published in 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing infectious puerperal morbidities in women undergoing operative vaginal deliveries including vacuum or forceps delivery, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (5 July 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials comparing any prophylactic antibiotic regimens with placebo or no treatment in women undergoing vacuum or forceps deliveries were eligible. Participants were all pregnant women without evidence of infections or other indications for antibiotics of any gestational age. Interventions were any antibiotic prophylaxis (any dosage regimen, any route of administration or at any time during delivery or the puerperium).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias. Two review authors extracted the data independently using prepared data extraction forms. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion and a consensus reached through discussion with all review authors. We assessed methodological quality of the two included studies using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies, involving 3813 women undergoing either vacuum or forceps deliveries, were included. One study involving 393 women compared the antibiotic intravenous cefotetan after cord clamping compared with no treatment. The other study involving 3420 women compared a single dose of intravenous amoxicillin and clavulanic acid with placebo using 20 mL of intravenous sterile 0.9% saline. The evidence suggests that prophylactic antibiotics reduce superficial perineal wound infection (risk ratio (RR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.40 to 0.69; women = 3420; 1 study; high-certainty evidence), deep perineal wound infection (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.69; women = 3420; 1 study; high-certainty evidence) and probably reduce wound breakdown (RR 0.52, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.63; women = 2593; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). We are unclear about the effect on organ or space perineal wound infection (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.05; women = 3420; 1 study) and endometritis (average RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.64; 15/1907 versus 30/1906; women = 3813; 2 studies) based on low-certainty evidence with wide CIs that include no effect. Prophylactic antibiotics probably lower serious infectious complications (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.89; women = 3420; 1 study; high-certainty evidence). They also have an important effect on reduction of confirmed or suspected maternal infection. The two included studies did not report on fever or urinary tract infection. It is unclear, based on low-certainty evidence, whether prophylactic antibiotics have any impact on maternal adverse reactions (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.18 to 22.05; women = 2593; 1 study) and maternal length of stay (MD 0.09 days, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.41; women = 393; 1 study) as the CIs were wide and included no effect. Prophylactic antibiotics slightly improve perineal pain and health consequences of perineal pain and probably reduce costs. Prophylactic antibiotics did not have an important effect on dyspareunia (difficult or painful sexual intercourse) or breastfeeding at six weeks. Antibiotic prophylaxis may slightly improve maternal hospital re-admission and maternal health-related quality of life. Neonatal adverse reactions were not reported in any included trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic intravenous antibiotics are effective in reducing infectious puerperal morbidities in terms of superficial and deep perineal wound infection or serious infectious complications in women undergoing operative vaginal deliveries without clinical indications for antibiotic administration after delivery. Prophylactic antibiotics slightly improve perineal pain and health consequences of perineal pain, probably reduce the costs, and may slightly reduce the maternal hospital re-admission and health-related quality of life. However, the effect on reduction of endometritis, organ or space perineal wound infection, maternal adverse reactions and maternal length of stay is unclear due to low-certainty evidence. As the evidence was mainly derived from a single multi-centre study conducted in a high-income setting, future well-designed randomised trials in other settings, particularly in low- and middle-income settings, are required to confirm the effect of antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery

BACKGROUND

Vacuum and forceps assisted vaginal deliveries are reported to increase the incidence of postpartum infections and maternal readmission to hospital compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery. Prophylactic antibiotics may be prescribed to prevent these infections. However, the benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal deliveries is still unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing infectious puerperal morbidities in women undergoing operative vaginal deliveries including vacuum or forceps deliveries, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (12 July 2017), ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (12 July 2017) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials comparing any prophylactic antibiotic regimens with placebo or no treatment in women undergoing vacuum or forceps deliveries were eligible. Participants were all pregnant women without evidence of infections or other indications for antibiotics of any gestational age undergoing vacuum or forceps delivery for any indications. Interventions were any antibiotic prophylaxis (any dosage regimen, any route of administration or at any time during delivery or the puerperium) compared with either placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and methodological quality. Two review authors extracted the data independently using prepared data extraction forms. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion and a consensus reached through discussion with all review authors. We assessed methodological quality of the one included trial using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

One trial, involving 393 women undergoing either vacuum or forceps deliveries, was included. The trial compared the antibiotic intravenous cefotetan after cord clamping compared with no treatment. This trial reported only two out of the nine outcomes specified in this review. Seven women in the group given no antibiotics had endomyometritis and none in prophylactic antibiotic group, the risk reduction was 93% (risk ratio (RR) 0.07; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 1.21; low-quality evidence). There was no difference in the length of hospital stay between the two groups (mean difference (MD) 0.09 days; 95% CI -0.23 to 0.41; low-quality evidence). Overall, the risk of bias was judged to be unclear. The quality of the evidence using GRADE was low for both endometritis and maternal length of stay.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

One small trial was identified reporting only two outcomes. Evidence from this single trial suggests that antibiotic prophylaxis may lead to little or no difference in endometritis or maternal length of stay. There were no data on any other outcomes to evaluate the impact of antibiotic prophylaxis after operative vaginal delivery. Future research on antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery is needed to conclude whether it is useful for reducing postpartum morbidity.

Reducing morbidity and mortality among pregnant obese

Obesity is increasing; in the UK, almost 20% of pregnant women have a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m(2). Obese mothers have increased risks of pregnancy complications including miscarriage, congenital anomaly, gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia, macrosomia, induction of labour, caesarean section, anaesthetic and surgical complications, post-partum haemorrhage, infection and venous thromboembolism. Complications tend to be greater in those with the highest BMIs. In recent triennia, obesity (27-29%) was over-represented in maternal mortality figures. Strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality include calculating BMI at booking visit to identify obese mothers and plan their antenatal care and delivery. This should include nutritional and lifestyle advice, screening for gestational diabetes and pre-eclampsia, thromboembolism risk assessment, antenatal anaesthetic review if BMI is ≥ 40 kg/m(2), ensuring availability of robust theatre tables and other equipment and involving senior doctors, especially in the labour ward. Afterwards, continuing weight reduction should be encouraged to reduce future pregnancy and health risks.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery

BACKGROUND

Vacuum and forceps assisted vaginal deliveries are reported to increase the incidence of postpartum infections and maternal readmission to hospital compared to spontaneous vaginal delivery. Prophylactic antibiotics may be prescribed to prevent these infections. However, the benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal deliveries is still unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing infectious puerperal morbidities in women undergoing operative vaginal deliveries including vacuum or forceps deliveries, or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials comparing any prophylactic antibiotic regimens with placebo or no treatment in women undergoing vacuum or forceps deliveries were eligible. Participants were all pregnant women without evidence of infections or other indications for antibiotics of any gestational age undergoing vacuum or forceps delivery for any indications. Interventions were any antibiotic prophylaxis (any dosage regimen, any route of administration or at any time during delivery or the puerperium) compared with either placebo or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed trial eligibility and methodological quality. Two review authors extracted the data independently using prepared data extraction forms. Any discrepancies were resolved by discussion and a consensus reached through discussion with all review authors. For this update, we assessed methodological quality of the one included trial using the standard Cochrane criteria and the GRADE approach. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD) using a fixed-effect model and all the review authors interpreted and discussed the results.

MAIN RESULTS

One trial, involving 393 women undergoing either vacuum or forceps deliveries, was included. This trial identified only two out of the nine outcomes specified in this review. It reported seven women with endomyometritis in the group given no antibiotic and none in prophylactic antibiotic group. This difference did not reach statistical significance, but the risk reduction was 93% (risk ratio (RR) 0.07; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00 to 1.21). There was no difference in the length of hospital stay between the two groups (mean difference (MD) 0.09 days; 95% CI -0.23 to 0.41). Overall, the risk of bias was judged as low. The quality of the evidence using GRADE was low for both endometritis and maternal length of stay.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The data were too few to make any recommendations for practice. Future research on antibiotic prophylaxis for operative vaginal delivery is needed to conclude whether it is useful for reducing postpartum morbidity.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth

BACKGROUND

One to eight per cent of women suffer third-degree perineal tear (anal sphincter injury) and fourth-degree perineal tear (rectal mucosa injury) during vaginal birth, and these tears are more common after forceps delivery (28%) and midline episiotomies. Third- and fourth-degree tears can become contaminated with bacteria from the rectum and this significantly increases in the chance of perineal wound infection. Prophylactic antibiotics might have a role in preventing this infection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing maternal morbidity and side effects in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2014) and the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing outcomes of prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no antibiotics in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the trial reports for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified and included one trial (147 women from a pre-planned sample size of 310 women) that compared the effect of prophylactic antibiotic (single-dose, second-generation cephalosporin - cefotetan or cefoxitin, 1 g intravenously) on postpartum perineal wound complications in third- or fourth-degree perineal tears compared with placebo. Perineal wound complications (wound disruption and purulent discharge) at the two-week postpartum check up were 8.20% and 24.10% in the treatment and the control groups respectively (risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 0.96). However, the high failed-appointment rate may limit the generalisability of the results. The overall risk of bias was low except for incomplete outcome data. The quality of the evidence using GRADE was moderate for infection rate at two weeks' postpartum, and low for infection rate at six weeks' postpartum.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although the data suggest that prophylactic antibiotics help to prevent perineal wound complications following third- or fourth-degree perineal tear, loss to follow-up was very high. The results should be interpreted with caution as they are based on one small trial.

Antibiotic prescribing in women during and after delivery in a non-teaching, tertiary care hospital in Ujjain, India: a prospective cross-sectional study

Objectives

Antibacterial drugs (hereafter referred to as antibiotics) are crucial to treat infections during delivery and postpartum period to reduce maternal mortality. Institutional deliveries have the potential to save lives of many women but extensive use of antibiotics, add to the development and spread of antibiotic resistance. The aim of this study was to present antibiotic prescribing among inpatients during and after delivery in a non-teaching, tertiary care hospital in the city of Ujjain, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Methods

A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted including women having had either a vaginal delivery or a cesarean section in the hospital. Trained nursing staff collected the data on daily bases, using a specific form attached to each patient file. Statistical analysis, including bivariate and multivariable logistic regression was conducted.

Results

Of the total 1077 women, 566 (53%) had a vaginal delivery and 511 (47%) had a cesarean section. Eighty-seven percent of the women that had a vaginal delivery and 98% of the women having a cesarean section were prescribed antibiotics. The mean number of days on antibiotics in hospital for the women with a vaginal delivery was 3.1 (±1.7) and for the women with cesarean section was 6.0 (±2.5). Twenty-eight percent of both the women with vaginal deliveries and the women with cesarean sections were prescribed antibiotics at discharge. The most commonly prescribed antibiotic group in the hospital for both the women that had a vaginal delivery and the women that had a cesarean section were third-generation cephalosporins (J01DD). The total number of defined daily doses (DDD) per100 bed days for women that had a vaginal delivery was 101, and 127 for women that had a cesarean section.

Conclusions

The high percentage of women having had a vaginal delivery that received antibiotics and the deviation from recommendation for cesarean section in the hospital is a cause of concern. Improved maternal health and rational use of antibiotics are intertwined. Specific policy and guidelines on how to prescribe antibiotics during delivery at health care facilities are needed. Additionally, monitoring system of antibiotic prescribing and resistance needs to be developed and implemented.

Operative vaginal deliveries: practical aspects

Forceps, vacuum, and cesarean sections are relatively recent additions to the obstetrician's armamentarium. The art of modern obstetrics is one that mandates from obstetricians the attentive vigilance of the development of natural processes and an active intervention when such processes fall outside normally accepted standards. What constitutes the "normal process" and the "accepted standard" is subject to discussion, and international variations in obstetric practice are in part the reflection of such controversies. This article presents a practical approach to the contemporary issue of instrumental deliveries, outlining supporting evidence (when available) and the most current position of professional colleges in obstetrics and gynecology.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth

BACKGROUND

One to eight per cent of women suffer third-degree perineal tear (anal sphincter injury) and fourth-degree perineal tear (rectal mucosa injury) during vaginal birth, and these tears are more common after forceps delivery (28%) and midline episiotomies. Third- and fourth-degree tears can become contaminated with bacteria from the rectum and this significantly increases in the chance of perineal wound infection. Prophylactic antibiotics might have a role in preventing this infection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing maternal morbidity and side effects in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2010) and the reference lists of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing outcomes of prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no antibiotics in third- and fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the reports and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified and included one trial (147 participants) that compared the effect of prophylactic antibiotic (single-dose, second generation cephalosporin, intravenously) on postpartum perineal wound complications in third- or fourth-degree perineal tears. Perineal wound complications (wound disruption and purulent discharge) at the two-week postpartum check up were 8.20% and 24.10% in the treatment and the control groups respectively (risk ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.12 to 0.96).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although the data suggest that prophylactic antibiotics help to prevent perineal wound complications following third- or fourth-degree perineal tear, loss to follow-up was very high. The results should be interpreted with caution as they are based on one small trial.

Choice of instruments for assisted vaginal delivery

BACKGROUND

Instrumental or assisted vaginal birth is commonly used to expedite birth for the benefit of either mother or baby or both. It is sometimes associated with significant complications for both mother and baby. The choice of instrument may be influenced by clinical circumstances, operator choice and availability of specific instruments.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate different instruments in terms of achieving a vaginal birth and avoiding significant morbidity for mother and baby.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 May 2010).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of assisted vaginal delivery using different instruments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality, extracted the data, and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 32 studies (6597 women) in this review. Forceps were less likely than the ventouse to fail to achieve a vaginal birth with the allocated instrument (risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 0.94). However, with forceps there was a trend to more caesarean sections, and significantly more third- or fourth-degree tears (with or without episiotomy), vaginal trauma, use of general anaesthesia, and flatus incontinence or altered continence. Facial injury was more likely with forceps (RR 5.10, 95% CI 1.12 to 23.25). Using a random-effects model because of heterogeneity between studies, there was a trend towards fewer cases of cephalhaematoma with forceps (average RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.11).Among different types of ventouse, the metal cup was more likely to result in a successful vaginal birth than the soft cup, with more cases of scalp injury and cephalhaematoma. The hand-held ventouse was associated with more failures than the metal ventouse, and a trend to fewer than the soft ventouse.Overall forceps or the metal cup appear to be most effective at achieving a vaginal birth, but with increased risk of maternal trauma with forceps and neonatal trauma with the metal cup.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is a recognised place for forceps and all types of ventouse in clinical practice. The role of operator training with any choice of instrument must be emphasised. The increasing risks of failed delivery with the chosen instrument from forceps to metal cup to hand-held to soft cup vacuum, and trade-offs between risks of maternal and neonatal trauma identified in this review need to be considered when choosing an instrument.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in obstetric procedures

OBJECTIVE

To review the evidence and provide recommendations on antibiotic prophylaxis for obstetrical procedures.

OUTCOMES

Outcomes evaluated include need and effectiveness of antibiotics to prevent infections in obstetrical procedures.

EVIDENCE

Published literature was retrieved through searches of Medline and The Cochrane Library on the topic of antibiotic prophylaxis in obstetrical procedures. Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies. Searches were updated on a regular basis and articles published from January 1978 to June 2009 were incorporated in the guideline. Current guidelines published by the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology were also incorporated. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.

VALUES

The evidence obtained was reviewed and evaluated by the Infectious Diseases Committee of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada under the leadership of the principal authors, and recommendations were made according to guidelines developed by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care (Table 1).

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS

Implementation of this guideline should reduce the cost and harm resulting from the administration of antibiotics when they are not required and the harm resulting from failure to administer antibiotics when they would be beneficial. SUMMARY STATEMENTS: 1. Available evidence does not support the use of prophylactic antibiotics to reduce infectious morbidity following operative vaginal delivery. (II-1) 2. There is insufficient evidence to argue for or against the use of prophylactic antibiotics to reduce infectious morbidity for manual removal of the placenta. (III) 3. There is insufficient evidence to argue for or against the use of prophylactic antibiotics at the time of postpartum dilatation and curettage for retained products of conception. (III) 4. Available evidence does not support the use of prophylactic antibiotics to reduce infectious morbidity following elective or emergency cerclage. (II-3) RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. All women undergoing elective or emergency Caesarean section should receive antibiotic prophylaxis. (I-A) 2. The choice of antibiotic for Caesarean section should be a single dose of a first-generation cephalosporin. If the patient has a penicillin allergy, clindamycin or erythromycin can be used. (I-A) 3. The timing of prophylactic antibiotics for Caesarean section should be 15 to 60 minutes prior to skin incision. No additional doses are recommended. (I-A) 4. If an open abdominal procedure is lengthy (>3 hours) or estimated blood loss is greater than 1500 mL, an additional dose of the prophylactic antibiotic may be given 3 to 4 hours after the initial dose. (III-L) 5. Prophylactic antibiotics may be considered for the reduction of infectious morbidity associated with repair of third and fourth degree perineal injury. (I-B) 6. In patients with morbid obesity (BMI>35), doubling the antibiotic dose may be considered. (III-B) 7. Antibiotics should not be administered solely to prevent endocarditis for patients who undergo an obstetrical procedure of any kind. (III-E).

Antibioprophylaxie dans le cadre d'interventions obstétricales

Objectif

Analyser les résultats et formuler des recommandations sur le recours à l'antibioprophylaxie dans le cadre d'interventions obstétricales.

Issues

Parmi les issues évaluées, on trouve la nécessité et l'efficacité du recours à des antibiotiques aux fins de la prévention des infections dans le cadre d'interventions obstétricales.

Résultats

La littérature publiée a été récupérée par l'intermédiaire de recherches menées dans Medline et The Cochrane Library au moyen de la rubrique « antibioprophylaxie dans le cadre d'interventions obstétricales ». Les résultats ont été restreints aux analyses systématiques, aux essais comparatifs randomisés / essais cliniques comparatifs et aux études observationnelles. Les recherches ont été mises à jour de façon régulière et les articles publiés entre janvier 1978 et juin 2009 ont été incorporés à la directive clinique. Les lignes directrices actuellement publiées par le American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology ont également été incorporées à la directive clinique. La littérature grise (non publiée) a été identifiée par l'intermédiaire de recherches menées dans les sites Web d'organismes s'intéressant à l'évaluation des technologies dans le domaine de la santé et d'organismes connexes, dans des collections de directives cliniques, dans des registres d'essais cliniques et auprès de sociétés de spécialité médicale nationales et internationales.

Valeurs

Les résultats obtenus ont été analysés et évalués par le comité sur les maladies infectieuses de la Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada sous la gouverne des auteures principales, et les recommandations ont été formulées conformément aux lignes directrices élaborées par le Groupe d'étude canadien sur les soins de santé préventifs (Tableau 1).

Avantages, désavantages et coûts

La mise en œuvre de la présente directive clinique devrait réduire les coûts et les torts attribuables à l’administration d’antibiotiques lorsque celle-ci ne s’avère pas requise, ainsi que les torts attribuables à la non-administration d’antibiotiques lorsque ceux-ci pourraient s’avérer bénéfiques.

Déclarations sommaires

1.

Les données disponibles ne soutiennent pas le recours à l'antibioprophylaxie en vue d'atténuer la morbidité infectieuse à la suite d'un accouchement vaginal opératoire. (II-1)

2.

Nous ne disposons pas de données suffisantes pour soutenir ou déconseiller le recours à l'antibioprophylaxie en vue d'atténuer la morbidité infectieuse dans les cas de retrait manuel du placenta. (III)

3.

Nous ne disposons pas de données suffisantes pour soutenir ou déconseiller le recours à l'antibioprophylaxie au moment de la dilatation-curetage postpartum visant des produits de conception en rétention. (III)

4.

Les données disponibles ne soutiennent pas le recours à l'antibioprophylaxie en vue d'atténuer la morbidité infectieuse à la suite d'un cerclage planifié ou d'urgence. (II-3)

Recommandations

1.

Toutes les femmes qui subissent une césarienne planifiée ou d'urgence devraient se voir administrer une antibioprophylaxie. (I-A)

2.

Une dose unique d'une céphalosporine de première génération devrait constituer l'antibiotique à privilégier pour ce qui est des césariennes. Lorsque la patiente présente une allergie à la pénicilline, on peut avoir recours à la clindamycine ou à l'érythromycine. (I-A)

3.

Dans le cas de la césarienne, l'antibioprophylaxie devrait être administrée de 15 à 60 minutes avant l'incision de la peau. Aucune dose additionnelle n'est recommandée. (I-A)

4.

Lorsqu'une intervention à abdomen ouvert est de longue durée (>3 heures) ou que la perte sanguine estimée est supérieure à 1 500 ml, une dose additionnelle d'antibiotique prophylactique peut être administrée de 3 à 4 heures à la suite de la dose initiale. (III-L)

5.

L'administration d'une antibioprophylaxie peut être envisagée pour atténuer la morbidité infectieuse associée à la réparation d'une lésion périnéale du troisième ou du quatrième degré. (I-B)

6.

Chez les patientes massivement obèses (IMC > 35), il est possible d'envisager le doublement de la dose d'antibiotiques. (III-B)

7.

L’administration d’antibiotiques aux seules fins de prévenir l’endocardite ne devrait pas être mise en œuvre chez les patientes qui doivent subir une intervention obstétricale, quelle qu’en soit la nature. (III-E)

Prophylactic antibiotics for the prevention of postpartum infectious morbidity in women infected with human immunodeficiency virus: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of intrapartum prophylactic antibiotics in the prevention of postpartum sepsis in laboring women who were infected with HIV.

STUDY DESIGN

In a double-blind, randomized trial that was conducted in Durban (South Africa), pregnant women who were infected with HIV in whom vaginal delivery was anticipated were randomized to receive either a single dose of cefoxitin (2 g) or placebo intrapartum. Signs of sepsis were evaluated within 72 hours and at 1 and 2 weeks postpartum.

RESULTS

Of the 424 women who were enrolled, 213 women received cefoxitin, and 211 women received placebo. Both groups were comparable in all baseline parameters. The overall sepsis rate was 19% (40/211 women) in the placebo group and 16.9% (36/213 women) in the cefoxitin group (P = .581). There was a 53% reduction in risk of postpartum endometritis in the cefoxitin group (95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.9).

CONCLUSION

The use of prophylactic intrapartum cefoxitin in HIV-infected women reduces the risk of postpartum endometritis.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth

BACKGROUND

One to eight per cent of women suffer third-degree perineal tears (anal sphincter injury) and fourth-degree perineal tear (rectal mucosa injury) during vaginal birth, and these tears are more common after forceps delivery (28%) and midline episiotomies. Fourth-degree tears can become contaminated with bacteria from the rectum and this significantly increases in the chance of perineal wound infection. Prophylactic antibiotics might have a role in preventing this infection.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis for reducing maternal morbidity and side-effects in fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group Trials Register (30 July 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 15 July 2005), and LILACS (1982 to 15 July 2005).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials which reported data comparing outcomes of prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no antibiotics in fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

No trials were found that met the selection criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

No randomised controlled trials were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to support a policy of routine prophylactic antibiotics in fourth-degree perineal tear during vaginal birth. A well-designed randomised controlled trial is needed.