ArticleAmerican journal of obstetrics and gynecology2013
Safety of macrolides during pregnancy.
Article in American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
38 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 90 citations in OpenAlex.
- Environmental exposure in the etiology of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2022Pooled it
- Prenatal Exposure to Macrolides and Risk of Congenital Malformations: A Meta-Analysis.Drug safety · 2020Pooled it
- Maternal Viral Infection and Risk of Fetal Congenital Heart Diseases: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2019Pooled it
- Association between exposure to macrolides and the development of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of pediatrics · 2019Pooled it
- The association of prenatal and postnatal macrolide exposure with subsequent development of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2019Pooled it
- Associations between use of macrolide antibiotics during pregnancy and adverse child outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2019Pooled it
- Post-natal erythromycin exposure and risk of infantile hypertrophic pyloric stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2016Pooled it
- Azithromycin to Prevent Sepsis or Death in Women Planning a Vaginal Birth.The New England journal of medicine · 2023Trial
- Prenatal Azithromycin Exposure and Risk of Neurodevelopmental Disorders in Children.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Cannabidiol in Reducing Virulence ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Age-stratified pharmacovigilance of azithromycin: a multimethod signal detection analysis in the FAERS database.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2025Article
- Pharmacokinetics of Maternal Drug Administration: Insights into Placental Transfer and Fetal Exposure.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2024Article
- Review
- Antibiotic use in endodontic treatment during pregnancy: A narrative review.European journal of translational myology · 2022Review
- Drugs for Intermittent Preventive Treatment of Malaria in Pregnancy: Current Knowledge and Way Forward.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2022Review
- An Update Review on Listeria Infection in Pregnancy.Infection and drug resistance · 2021Review
- Placental transfer and safety in pregnancy of medications under investigation to treat coronavirus disease 2019.American journal of obstetrics & gynecology MFM · 2020Review
- Will Hydroxychloroquine Still Be a Game-Changer for COVID-19 by Combining Azithromycin?Frontiers in immunology · 2020Review
- Azithromycin Protects against Zika virus Infection by Upregulating virus-induced Type I and III Interferon Responses.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2019Article
- Antiviral Agents in Development for Zika Virus Infections.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePrior studies have reported increased risks of congenital heart defects (CHD) and pyloric stenosis (PS) after prenatal exposure to macrolide antibiotics. We sought to assess the association between maternal use of erythromycin and nonerythromycin macrolides and the risks of CHD and PS. STUDY
designAmong participants in the Slone Epidemiology Center Birth Defects Study from 1994 through 2008, we identified 4132 infants with CHD and 735 with PS as cases, and 6952 infants without any malformation as controls. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) associated with use of erythromycin or nonerythromycin macrolides in each trimester using conditional logistic regression and adjusting for risk factors for CHD and PS, fever, specific types of infections, and their associated treatments.
resultsDuring the first trimester, 0.4% and 0.7% of control women had used erythromycin and nonerythromycin macrolides, respectively. Compared to non-use during pregnancy, first-trimester exposure to erythromycin was not associated with an increased risk of CHD (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.6-2.6) or PS (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.3-3.0). The corresponding ORs for nonerythromycin macrolides were 0.7 (95% CI, 0.4-1.3) for CHD and 1.7 (95% CI, 0.6-4.6) for PS. We found no association between third-trimester exposure to erythromycin or nonerythromycin macrolides and the risk of PS. Hypothesis generation analyses did not identify appreciable associations between maternal use of macrolides and other common specific birth defects.
conclusionWe found no meaningful associations between the risks of CHD, PS, and other common malformations in relation to use of macrolides in pregnancy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.