Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33661539›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2021

Different classes of antibiotics given to women routinely for preventing infection at caesarean section.

Myfanwy J Williams, Carolina Carvalho Ribeiro do Valle, Gillian Ml Gyte

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Reducing post-cesarean sepsis: Current best practice in prevention and treatment.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Sudden Deterioration of a Young Patient During Elective Cesarean Section. Amniotic Fluid Embolism… or Else? - A Case Report.Journal of critical care medicine (Universitatea de Medicina si Farmacie din Targu-Mures) · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Myfanwy J WilliamsCochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Carolina Carvalho Ribeiro do ValleInfection Prevention and Control, Hospital da Mulher Prof. Dr. José Aristodemo Pinotti - CAISM, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
Gillian Ml GyteCochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group, Department of Women's and Children's Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCaesarean section increases the risk of postpartum infection for women and prophylactic antibiotics have been shown to reduce the incidence; however, there are adverse effects. It is important to identify the most effective class of antibiotics to use and those with the least adverse effects. 

objectivesTo determine, from the best available evidence, the balance of benefits and harms between different classes of antibiotic given prophylactically to women undergoing caesarean section, considering their effectiveness in reducing infectious complications for women and adverse effects on both mother and infant. SEARCH

methodsFor this 2020 update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (2 December 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different classes of prophylactic antibiotics given to women undergoing caesarean section.  RCTs published in abstract form were also included. We excluded trials that compared drugs with placebo or drugs within a specific class; these are assessed in other Cochrane Reviews. We excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over trials. Cluster-RCTs were eligible for inclusion but none were identified. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN

resultsWe included 39 studies, with 33 providing data (8073 women). Thirty-two studies (7690 women) contributing data administered antibiotics systemically, while one study (383 women) used lavage and was analysed separately. We identified three main comparisons that addressed clinically important questions on antibiotics at caesarean section (all systemic administration), but we only found studies for one comparison, 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins (1 AUTHORS'

conclusionsBased on the best currently available evidence, 'antistaphylococcal cephalosporins' and 'broad spectrum penicillins plus betalactamase inhibitors' may have similar efficacy at caesarean section when considering immediate postoperative infection, although we did not have clear evidence for several important outcomes. Most trials administered antibiotics at or after cord clamping, or post-operatively, so results may have limited applicability to current practice which generally favours administration prior to skin incision. We have no data on any infant outcomes, nor on late infections (up to 30 days) in the mother; these are important gaps in the evidence that warrant further research. Antimicrobial resistance is very important but more appropriately investigated by other trial designs.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisBacterial Infectionsbeta-Lactamase InhibitorsCephalosporinsCesarean SectionFemaleHumansInfant, NewbornPenicillinsPostoperative ComplicationsPregnancyPuerperal InfectionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-Lactamase InhibitorsCephalosporinsPenicillins

Identifiers

PMID33661539
PMCPMC8092483

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.