Antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent postoperative infectious morbidity in low-risk elective cesarean deliveries: a prospective randomized clinical trial

[The cesarean procedure: Guidelines for clinical practice from the French College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists]

OBJECTIVE

To identify procedures to reduce maternal morbidity during cesarean.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The quality of evidence of the literature was assessed following the GRADE® method with questions formulated in the PICO format (Patients, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) and outcomes defined a priori and classified according to their importance. An extensive bibliographic search was performed on PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE databases. The quality of the evidence was assessed (high, moderate, low, very low) and a (i) strong or (ii) weak recommendations or (iii) no recommendation were formulated. The recommendations were reviewed in two rounds with external reviewers (Delphi survey) to select the consensus recommendations.

RESULTS

Of the 27 questions, there was agreement between the working group and the external reviewers on 26. The level of evidence of the literature was insufficient to provide a recommendation on 15 questions. Preventing hypothermia is recommended to increase maternal satisfaction and comfort (weak recommendation) and to reduce neonatal hypothermia (strong recommendation). The quality of the evidence of the literature did not allow to recommend the skin disinfectant to be used nor the relevance of a preoperative vaginal disinfection nor the choice between the use or nonuse of an indwelling bladder catheterization (if micturition takes place 1 hour before the cesarean section). The Misgav-Ladach technique or its analogues should be considered rather than the Pfannenstiel technique to reduce maternal morbidity (weak recommendation) bladder flap before uterine incision should not be performed routinely (weak recommendation), but a blunt (weak recommendation) and cephalad-caudad extension of uterine incision (weak recommendation) should be considered to reduce maternal morbidity. Antibiotic prophylaxis is recommended to reduce maternal infectious morbidity (strong recommendation) without recommendation on its type or the timing of administration (before incision or after cord clamping). The administration of carbetocin after cord clamping does not significantly decrease the incidence of blood loss>1000 ml, anemia, or blood transfusion compared with the administration of oxytocin. Thus, it is not recommended to use carbetocin rather than oxytocin in cesarean. It is recommended that systematic manual removal of the placenta not to be performed (weak recommendation). An antiemetic should be administered after cord clamping in women having a planned cesarean under locoregional anaesthesia to reduce intraoperative and postoperative nausea and vomiting (strong recommendation) with no recommendation regarding choice of use one or two antiemetics. The level of evidence of the literature was insufficient to provide any recommendation concerning single or double-layer closure of the uterine incision, or the uterine exteriorization. Closing the peritoneum (visceral or parietal) should not be considered (weak recommendation). The quality of the evidence of the literature was not sufficient to provide recommendation on systematic subcutaneous closure, including in obese or overweight patients, or the use of subcuticular suture in obese or overweight patients. The use of subcuticular suture in comparison with skin closure by staples was not considered as a recommendation due to the absence of a consensus in the external review rounds.

CONCLUSION

In case of cesarean, preventing hypothermia, administering antiemetic and antibiotic prophylaxis after cord clamping are the only strong recommendations. The Misgav-Ladach technique, the way of performing uterine incision (no systematic bladder flap, blunt cephalad-caudad extension), not performing routine manual removal of the placenta nor closure of the peritoneum are weak recommendations and may reduce maternal morbidity.

Impact of mass and systematic antibiotic administration on antibiotic resistance in low- and middle-income countries? A systematic review

Antibiotic consumption is a key driver of antimicrobial resistance (AR), particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where risk factors for AR emergence and spread are prevalent. However, the potential contribution of mass drug administration (MDA) and systematic drug administration (SDA) of antibiotics to AR spread is unknown. We conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of MDA/SDA in LMICs, including indications, antibiotics used and, if investigated, levels of AR over time. This systematic review is reported in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Of 2438 identified articles, 63 were reviewed: indications for MDA/SDA were various, and targeted populations were particularly vulnerable, including pregnant women, children, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected populations, and communities in outbreak settings. Available data suggest that MDA/SDA may lead to a significant increase in AR, especially following azithromycin administration. However, only 40% of studies evaluated AR. Integrative approaches that evaluate AR in addition to clinical outcomes are needed to understand the consequences of MDA/SDA implementation, combined with standardised AR surveillance for timely detection of AR emergence.

Comparing prophylactic use of cefazolin for SSI in cesarean section: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To summarize the available evidence to explore the effect of different prophylactic cefazolin regimens on postoperative surgical site infection after cesarean section.

METHODS

We searched WOS, Pubmed, and EMBASE Database also traced citations in the reference sections of the retrieved studies. English search words: Cesarean section, Surgical site infection, Cefazolin. The majority of the literature are randomized controlled trials comparing varied regimens of cefazolin.

RESULTS

A total of 11 randomized controlled trials and 4 non-randomized controlled trials involving 16,328 pregnant women were eligible. There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of SSI after cesarean section when cefazolin was given at a high dose compared with cefazolin at a low dose (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.57-1.04, I² = 0.0%). The risk of SSI after cesarean section was reduced by prophylactic use of cefazolin before skin incision compared with that after the umbilical cord clamping (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29-0.82, I² = 53.4%). Because of the extreme heterogeneity of the combined drug use, no meta-analysis results were provided. The consequences of cefazolin combined with other antibiotics (either orally or intravenously) vary widely. For pregnant women with different risk factors, cefazolin alone or the type, dose and drug route of cefazolin combined with additional antibiotics need to be further studied and explored.

CONCLUSIONS

All in all, this article illustrates a better use of cefazolin for the control of Surgical incision site infection in the cesarean section. For pregnant women with cesarean section without high-risk factors of infection, the use of cefazolin is effective, but for pregnant women with different high-risk factors, the specific use of prophylactic antibiotics needs to be further explored.

Cost-effectiveness of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cesarean section

Background

The proportion of pregnant women delivered by cesarean section has increased steadily during the past three decades. The risk of infection is 10-fold augmented after elective cesarean section compared to vaginal delivery. Antibiotic prophylaxis may reduce endometritis by 62% and superficial wound infection by 38% after elective cesarean section. International guidelines recommend antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cesarean section, but this procedure is not routinely followed in Sweden. Studies of costs of antibiotic prophylaxis in cesarean section show conflicting results and are based on substantially different incidence of postoperative infections. No study of costs of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cesarean section in a Swedish or Nordic context has been pursued. The aim of this study was to investigate if antibiotic prophylaxis is cost-reducing in elective cesarean section in Örebro County, Sweden.

Methods

All women undergoing elective cesarean in the Region Örebro County health care system during 2011–2012 were eligible for inclusion. Postoperative infections and risk factors for infections were registered. A hypothetical situation in which all participants had received antibiotic prophylaxis was compared to the actual situation, in which none of them had received antibiotic prophylaxis. The reduction in the risk of postoperative infections resulting from antibiotic prophylaxis was based on a meta-analysis. Costs for in-patient care of postoperative infections were extracted from the accounting system, and costs for out-patient care were calculated according to standard costs. Costs for antibiotic prophylaxis were calculated and compared with the cost reduction that would be implied by the introduction of such prophylaxis.

Results

The incidences of deep and superficial surgical site infection were 3.5% and 1.3% respectively. Introduction of antibiotic prophylaxis would reduce health care costs by 31 Euro per cesarean section performed (95% credible interval 4–58 Euro). The probability of cost-saving was 99%.

Conclusions

Antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cesarean section is cost-reducing in this health care setting. Our results indicate that the introduction of antibiotic prophylaxis in elective cesarean section can also be cost-saving in low infection rate settings.

Trial registration Ethical approval was given by the Regional Ethical Review Board in Uppsala (registration number 2013/484).