ArticleGynecologic and obstetric investigation2026
Maternal and Microbiological Outcomes in GBS-Positive Patients Receiving Intrapartum Ampicillin versus Clindamycin: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
Article in Gynecologic and obstetric investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Treatment of Neonatal Group B Streptococcus Disease in the Era of Antimicrobial Resistance.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
<p>Objectives: Early-onset Group B Streptococcus (GBS) infection is a major cause of neonatal morbidity and mortality, which can be prevented through intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP). First-line β-lactams (penicillin or ampicillin) are preferred, whereas clindamycin is reserved for patients with a confirmed high-risk penicillin allergy and documented susceptibility. Increasing clindamycin resistance and concerns about intra-amniotic efficacy highlight the need to evaluate maternal outcomes. This study examined maternal infectious morbidity, neonatal outcomes, and microbiological findings in GBS-positive term patients receiving ampicillin versus clindamycin IAP.
designThis retrospective cohort study was conducted between March 2021 and March 2024 at a tertiary university-affiliated hospital. Participants/Materials: Singleton term pregnancies (≥37 weeks) with a documented positive GBS vaginal-rectal culture obtained within 5 weeks before delivery were included. Patients received either ampicillin (n = 1,833) according to the institutional protocol or clindamycin (n = 78) if they reported a severe β-lactam allergy. No intrapartum clindamycin susceptibility testing was performed.
settingThe study was conducted at a tertiary university-affiliated hospital between March 2021 and March 2024.
methodsThe co-primary outcomes were clinical chorioamnionitis and admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Secondary maternal outcomes included intrapartum fever, postpartum fever, postpartum antibiotic administration use, and cesarean delivery. Secondary neonatal outcomes included a 5-min Apgar score of <7, umbilical cord pH at <7.1, respiratory distress, and ventilatory support. Chorioamniotic swabs were obtained after delivery. Data were analyzed using chi-square or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables, t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests for continuous variables, and multivariable logistic regression to identify independent predictors.
resultsBaseline maternal and obstetric characteristics were similar. Compared with ampicillin, clindamycin was associated with significantly higher rates of intrapartum fever (23.1% vs. 2.3%, p < 0.001), clinical chorioamnionitis (9.0% vs. 0.5%, p < 0.001), postpartum fever (5.1% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.001), and postpartum antibiotic use (7.6% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.001). Cesarean delivery rates did not differ significantly (19.2% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.084). NICU admission and other neonatal outcomes were comparable. Compared with ampicillin, clindamycin IAP was identified as a strong independent predictor of clinical chorioamnionitis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 20.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 6.6-61.4, p < 0.001), together with prolonged rupture of membranes >18 h (aOR 4.9, 95% CI 1.6-15.7, p = 0.006) and cervical ripening by catheter balloon (aOR 4.1, 95% CI 1.2-13.6, p = 0.023). Postpartum, GBS-positive chorioamniotic cultures were significantly more frequent among patients who received clindamycin compared with those who received ampicillin (28.2% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This retrospective, single-center study may be subject to bias and has limited generalizability. The small clindamycin group reduced the power for rare outcomes. Penicillin allergy was self-reported without confirmatory testing, and clindamycin susceptibility was not assessed intrapartum.
conclusionsAmong GBS-positive term patients, intrapartum clindamycin prophylaxis was associated with markedly higher maternal infectious morbidity and increased GBS detection in chorioamniotic cultures compared with ampicillin, without significant differences in neonatal outcomes. These findings raise concerns about the intra-amniotic effectiveness of clindamycin and support minimizing its use whenever possible. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings and to evaluate alternative prophylactic regimens for patients with penicillin allergy. </p>.
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.