Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12137684›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002

Antibiotic regimens for management of intraamniotic infection.

L Hopkins, F Smaill

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Antibiotic regimens for management of intra-amniotic infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Current management and long-term outcomes following chorioamnionitis.Obstetrics and gynecology clinics of North America · 2014
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

L HopkinsDepartment of Pathology and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Room 2N29, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, L8N 3Z5.
F Smaill
McMaster University · CAUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIntraamniotic infection is associated with maternal morbidity and neonatal sepsis, pneumonia and death. Although antibiotic treatment is accepted as the standard of care, few studies have been conducted to examine the effectiveness of different antibiotic regimens for this infection and whether to administer antibiotics intrapartum or postpartum.

objectivesTo study the effects of different maternal antibiotic regimens for intraamniotic infection on maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (May 2002) and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials where there was a randomized comparison of different antibiotic regimens to treat women with a diagnosis of intraamniotic infection were included. The primary outcome was perinatal morbidity. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted from each publication independently by the authors. MAIN

resultsTwo eligible trials (181 women) were included in this review. No trials were identified that compared antibiotic treatment with no treatment. Intrapartum treatment with antibiotics for intraamniotic infection was associated with a reduction in neonatal sepsis (relative risk (RR) 0.08; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.00, 1.44) and pneumonia (RR 0.15; CI 0.01, 2.92) compared with treatment given immediately postpartum, but these results did not reach statistical significance (number of women studied = 45). There was no difference in the incidence of maternal bacteremia (RR 2.19; CI 0.25, 19.48). There was no difference in the outcomes of neonatal sepsis (RR 2.16; CI 0.20, 23.21) or neonatal death (RR 0.72; CI 0.12, 4.16) between a regimen with and without anaerobic activity (number of women studied = 133). There was a trend towards a decrease in the incidence of post-partum endometritis in women who received treatment with ampicillin, gentamicin and clindamycin compared with ampicillin and gentamicin alone, but this did not reach statistical significance (RR 0.54; CI 0.19, 1.49). REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThe conclusions that can be drawn from this meta-analysis are limited due to the small number of studies. For none of the outcomes was a statistically significant difference seen between the different interventions. Current consensus is for the intrapartum administration of antibiotics when the diagnosis of intraamniotic infection is made; however, the results of this review neither support nor refute this although there was a trend towards improved neonatal outcomes when antibiotics were administered intrapartum. No recommendations can be made on the most appropriate antimicrobial regimen to choose to treat intraamniotic infection.

Indexed as

AmnionAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacterial InfectionsFemaleHumansPlacenta DiseasesPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID12137684
PMCPMC6669261
OpenAlexW3151214936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.