Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38486177›Full record

SynthesisBMC pregnancy and childbirth2024

Can the use of azithromycin during labour reduce the incidence of infection among puerperae and newborns? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Haiyan Ye, Jinlu Hu, Bo Li, Xia Yu, Xuemei Zheng

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Haiyan Ye *Department of adult intensive care unite, School of Medicine, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China.
Jinlu Hu *Department of adult intensive care unite, School of Medicine, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China.
Bo LiDepartment of adult intensive care unite, School of Medicine, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China. 13408039256@163.com.
Xia YuDepartment of laboratory, School of Medicine, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China.
Xuemei ZhengDepartment of adult intensive care unite, School of Medicine, Chengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, 611731, China.
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China · CNChengdu Women's and Children's Central Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis investigated whether the use of azithromycin during labour or caesarean section reduces the incidence of sepsis and infection among mothers and newborns. DATA SOURCES: We independently searched the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and EMBASE databases for relevant studies published before February, 2024.

methodsWe included RCTs that evaluated the effect of prenatal oral or intravenous azithromycin or placebo on intrapartum or postpartum infection incidence. We included studies evaluating women who had vaginal births as well as caesarean sections. Studies reporting maternal and neonatal infections were included in the current analysis. Review Manager 5.4 was used to analyse 6 randomized clinical trials involving 44,448 mothers and 44,820 newborns. The risk of bias of each included study was assessed using the criteria outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Primary outcomes included the incidence of maternal sepsis and all-cause mortality and neonatal sepsis and all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes included maternal (endometritis, wound and surgical site infections, chorioamnionitis, and urinary tract infections) and neonatal outcomes (infections of the eyes, ears and skin). A random-effects model was used to test for overall effects and heterogeneity.

resultsThe pooled odds ratios (ORs) were as follows: 0.65 for maternal sepsis (95% CI, 0.55-0.77; I

conclusionIn this meta-analysis, azithromycin use during labour reduced the incidence of maternal sepsis, endometritis, incisional infections and urinary tract infections but did not reduce the incidence of neonatal-associated infections, except for neonatal skin infections. These findings indicate that azithromycin may be potentially beneficial for maternal postpartum infections, but its effect on neonatal prognosis remains unclear. Azithromycin should be used antenatally only if the clinical indication is clear and the potential benefits outweigh the harms.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicCesarean SectionEndometritisFemaleHumansIncidenceInfant, NewbornLabor, ObstetricNeonatal SepsisPregnancyPuerperal InfectionSepsisAnti-Bacterial AgentsAzithromycinAzithromycinInfectionLabourNewbornsPuerperaeSepsis

Identifiers

PMID38486177
PMCPMC10938810
OpenAlexW4392811028

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.