ORIGINAL PAPER
The analysis of bacteriologically negative congenital infections in neonates with regard to the type of labour and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis
Submission date: 2018-12-16
Final revision date: 2019-02-08
Acceptance date: 2019-03-18
Publication date: 2019-04-29
Pediatr Pol 2019;94(2):100-104
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Aim of the study:
To analyse neonates with bacteriologically negative congenital infections with regard to the type of labour and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP).
Material and methods:
The research material included the medical history data of 1328 born-alive neonates from single pregnancies, and the data of their mothers. A c2 test (also with Yates correction) was employed to perform fraction analysis. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results:
The neonates with congenital infections were hospitalised for considerably longer than the uninfected ones irrespective of whether they were born vaginally (p < 0.001) or via C-section (p < 0.0007). The uninfected neonates scored significantly higher on the Apgar scale (p < 0.0001). 1.23% of the mothers who did not receive IAP and 3.37% of those who received IAP gave birth to ill neonates. The total percentage of infants with clinically confirmed infections was 1.81% (p = 0.0096). Clinically confirmed congenital infections were found in 1.13% of the neonates from vaginal labours and 4.55% of those born via C-section (p = 0.0001).
Conclusions:
Early symptomatic infections in neonates can develop without positive bacteriological culture results. IAP can modify the occurrence and/or the course of clinically confirmed congenital infections. Empirical antibiotic treatment of infections administered during the first 24 hours does not seem to be the best solution; however, currently it is necessary. The colour of amniotic fluid and the type of labour, especially when accompanied by other risk factors, may suggest an infection.
To analyse neonates with bacteriologically negative congenital infections with regard to the type of labour and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP).
Material and methods:
The research material included the medical history data of 1328 born-alive neonates from single pregnancies, and the data of their mothers. A c2 test (also with Yates correction) was employed to perform fraction analysis. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05.
Results:
The neonates with congenital infections were hospitalised for considerably longer than the uninfected ones irrespective of whether they were born vaginally (p < 0.001) or via C-section (p < 0.0007). The uninfected neonates scored significantly higher on the Apgar scale (p < 0.0001). 1.23% of the mothers who did not receive IAP and 3.37% of those who received IAP gave birth to ill neonates. The total percentage of infants with clinically confirmed infections was 1.81% (p = 0.0096). Clinically confirmed congenital infections were found in 1.13% of the neonates from vaginal labours and 4.55% of those born via C-section (p = 0.0001).
Conclusions:
Early symptomatic infections in neonates can develop without positive bacteriological culture results. IAP can modify the occurrence and/or the course of clinically confirmed congenital infections. Empirical antibiotic treatment of infections administered during the first 24 hours does not seem to be the best solution; however, currently it is necessary. The colour of amniotic fluid and the type of labour, especially when accompanied by other risk factors, may suggest an infection.
REFERENCES (14)
1.
Kotarski J, Heczko PB, Lauterbach R, et al. Rekomendacje Polskiego Towarzystwa Ginekologicznego dotyczące wykrywania nosicielstwa paciorkowców grupy B (GBS) u kobiet w ciąży i zapobiegania zakażeniom u noworodków. Ginekol Pol 2008; 79: 221-223.
2.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Perinatal group B streptococcal disease after universal screening recommendations – United States, 2003-2005. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2007; 56: 701-705.
3.
Mercer BM, Ramsey RD, Sibai BM. Prenatal screening for group B Streptococcus. I. Impact of antepartum screening on antenatal prophylaxis and intrapartum care. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 837-841.
4.
Mercer BM, Ramsey RD, Sibai BM. Prenatal screening for group B Streptococcus. II. Impact of antepartum screening and prophylaxis on neonatal care. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1995; 173: 842-846.
5.
Peralta-Carcelen M, Fargason CA, Cliver SP. Impact of maternal group B streptococcal screening on pediatric management in full-term newborns. Arch Ped Adolesc Med 1996; 150: 802-808.
6.
Wiswell TE, Stoll BJ, Tuggle JM. Management of asymptomatic, term gestation neonates born to mothers treated with intrapartum antibiotics. Pediatr Infect Dis J 1990; 9: 826-831.
7.
Balter S, Zell ER, O’Brien KL, et al. Impact of intrapartum antibiotics on the care and evaluation of the neonate. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2003; 22: 853-857.
8.
Glasgow TS, Speakman M, Firth S, et al. Clinical and economic outcomes for term infants associated with increasing administration of antibiotics to their mothers. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 2007; 21: 338-346.
9.
Escobar GJ, Li DK, Armstrong MA, et al. Neonatal sepsis workups in infants ≥ 2000 grams at birth: A population based study. Pediatrics 2000; 106: 256-263.
10.
Falciglia G, Hageman JR, Schreiber M, et al. Antibiotic Therapy and Early Onset Sepsis. NeoReviews 2012; 13: 86.
11.
Luck S, Torny M, d’Agapeyeff K, et al. Estimated early-onset group B streptococcal neonatal disease. Lancet 2003; 361: 1953-1954.
12.
Barber EL, Zhao G, Buhimschi IA, et al. Duration of intrapartum prophylaxis and concentration of penicillin G in fetal serum at delivery. Obstet Gynecol 2008; 112: 265-270.
13.
Bloom SL, Cox SM, Bawdon RE, et al. Ampicillin for neonatal group B streptococcal prophylaxis: how rapidly can bactericidal concentrations be achieved. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1996; 175: 974-976.
14.
Łopaciuk U, Dzierżanowska D. Bakteryjne zakażenia krwi – współczesne poglądy na etiologię, rozpoznawanie i leczenie. Kompendium Med 2001; 1: 11-21.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
