Still No Substantial Evidence to Use Prophylactic Antibiotic at Operative Vaginal Delivery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.6 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Obstetrics and Gynecology International Pub Date : 2020-05-19 eCollection Date: 2020-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2020/1582653
Yifru Berhan, Sisay Kirba, Achamyelesh Gebre
{"title":"Still No Substantial Evidence to Use Prophylactic Antibiotic at Operative Vaginal Delivery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Yifru Berhan,&nbsp;Sisay Kirba,&nbsp;Achamyelesh Gebre","doi":"10.1155/2020/1582653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postpartum maternal infection is still a common problem worldwide, mainly due to obstetric risk factors. The use of prophylactic antibiotic at operative vaginal delivery (OVD), taking it as a standalone risk factor, has been controversial. The purpose of this review was to rigorously evaluate the association of OVD with postpartum infection and shed light on such highly controversial issue.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A computer-based literature search was done mainly in the databases of PUBMED, HINARI health research, and the Cochrane library. Systematic review and meta-analysis were done by including 14 articles published between 1990 and August 2019.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average absolute risk of postpartum infection at OVD from seven large cohort studies was 1%. Few studies showed a weak association of OVD with postpartum infection without being adjusted to perineal wound, but the pooled meta-analysis showed statistically significant association with non-OVD. In the included randomized trial, 97% of the study participants had perineal wound for whom repairs were performed; the risks of maternal infection and perineal wound breakdown were comparable, and maternal infections other than perineal wound infection did not show significant difference between prophylactic antibiotic and placebo groups. The majority of included studies demonstrated a strong association of postpartum infection and perineal wound dehiscence with episiotomy and perineal tear.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both the relative and absolute risks of postpartum infection at OVD are extremely low unless accompanied by episiotomy and 3<sup>rd</sup>/4<sup>th</sup>t degree perineal tear. From previous studies, there is no substantial evidence to use prophylactic antibiotic at OVD, but episiotomy and perineal tear.</p>","PeriodicalId":19439,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and Gynecology International","volume":"2020 ","pages":"1582653"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2020/1582653","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and Gynecology International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1582653","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Postpartum maternal infection is still a common problem worldwide, mainly due to obstetric risk factors. The use of prophylactic antibiotic at operative vaginal delivery (OVD), taking it as a standalone risk factor, has been controversial. The purpose of this review was to rigorously evaluate the association of OVD with postpartum infection and shed light on such highly controversial issue.

Methods: A computer-based literature search was done mainly in the databases of PUBMED, HINARI health research, and the Cochrane library. Systematic review and meta-analysis were done by including 14 articles published between 1990 and August 2019.

Results: The average absolute risk of postpartum infection at OVD from seven large cohort studies was 1%. Few studies showed a weak association of OVD with postpartum infection without being adjusted to perineal wound, but the pooled meta-analysis showed statistically significant association with non-OVD. In the included randomized trial, 97% of the study participants had perineal wound for whom repairs were performed; the risks of maternal infection and perineal wound breakdown were comparable, and maternal infections other than perineal wound infection did not show significant difference between prophylactic antibiotic and placebo groups. The majority of included studies demonstrated a strong association of postpartum infection and perineal wound dehiscence with episiotomy and perineal tear.

Conclusion: Both the relative and absolute risks of postpartum infection at OVD are extremely low unless accompanied by episiotomy and 3rd/4tht degree perineal tear. From previous studies, there is no substantial evidence to use prophylactic antibiotic at OVD, but episiotomy and perineal tear.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

仍然没有实质性的证据表明在阴道手术分娩中使用预防性抗生素:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:产妇产后感染仍是世界范围内的一个常见问题,主要是由产科危险因素引起的。在阴道手术分娩(OVD)中使用预防性抗生素,将其作为一个独立的风险因素,一直存在争议。本综述的目的是严格评估OVD与产后感染的关系,并阐明这一备受争议的问题。方法:计算机检索文献,主要检索PUBMED、HINARI健康研究数据库和Cochrane图书馆。对1990年至2019年8月期间发表的14篇文章进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。结果:七项大型队列研究中,OVD产后感染的平均绝对风险为1%。很少有研究显示OVD与产后感染的相关性较弱,而没有调整到会阴伤口,但汇总meta分析显示OVD与非OVD的相关性具有统计学意义。在纳入的随机试验中,97%的研究参与者有会阴伤口并进行了修复;母体感染和会阴创面破裂的风险具有可比性,预防性抗生素组和安慰剂组之间除会阴创面感染外的母体感染无显著差异。大多数纳入的研究表明,会阴切开术和会阴撕裂与产后感染和会阴伤口裂开密切相关。结论:除非伴有会阴切开术和会阴3 /4度撕裂术,否则OVD患者发生产后感染的相对和绝对风险极低。从以往的研究来看,没有充分的证据表明OVD可以预防性使用抗生素,但会阴切开和会阴撕裂除外。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Obstetrics and Gynecology International
Obstetrics and Gynecology International OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊介绍: Obstetrics and Gynecology International is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that aims to provide a forum for scientists and clinical professionals working in obstetrics and gynecology. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to obstetrics, maternal-fetal medicine, general gynecology, gynecologic oncology, uro-gynecology, reproductive medicine and infertility, reproductive endocrinology, and sexual medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信