Association between intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus colonization and clinical chorioamnionitis among patients undergoing induction of labor at term

医学 绒毛膜羊膜炎 预防性抗生素 链球菌 随机对照试验 B组 无乳链球菌 产科 抗生素 怀孕 内科学 妊娠期 遗传学 生物 微生物学 细菌
作者
Jennifer A. McCoy,Kira A. Bromwich,Kristin D. Gerson,Lisa D. Levine
出处
期刊:American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology [Elsevier]
卷期号:229 (6): 672.e1-672.e8 被引量:5
标识
DOI:10.1016/j.ajog.2023.06.038
摘要

Background Rectovaginal colonization with Group B Streptococcus during pregnancy has historically been shown to be associated with an increased risk of clinical chorioamnionitis and peripartum infectious morbidity. Objective Newer observational data in the era of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis suggest a possible reversal of this association; however, it is unclear if this is related to differences in labor management for those with and without Group B Streptococcus colonization. We therefore sought to assess the association between intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus colonization and clinical chorioamnionitis within the context of a randomized induction of labor trial with a standardized labor protocol. Study Design We performed an exploratory secondary analysis of a randomized trial of patients undergoing term induction at a tertiary care center. Patients received third trimester Group B Streptococcus screening and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis as routine care. Group B Streptococcus detection was performed using a carrot broth-enhanced subculture to Group B Streptococcus Detect approach (Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA). Labor management was protocolized per the trial. Patients with unknown Group B Streptococcus status or who did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, if indicated, were excluded. The primary outcome was diagnosis of clinical chorioamnionitis, compared between patients who received intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for known Group B Streptococcus positive status (by culture, history, or Group B Streptococcus bacteriuria) and those who were Group B Streptococcus negative and did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis. Secondary outcomes included postpartum endometritis, wound infection, a composite maternal peripartum infectious morbidity, and neonatal outcomes. Results A total of 491 patients were enrolled in the trial. Of these, 466 had a known Group B Streptococcus status and received or did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis accordingly and were included in this analysis: 292 (62.7%) were Group B Streptococcus negative and did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, and 174 (37.3%) were Group B Streptococcus positive and received intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis. The majority of patients were Non-Hispanic Black (78.1%) and nulliparous (59.7%). There were no differences in demographic, clinical, induction or labor characteristics between groups. Patients who were Group B Streptococcus positive had a 49% lower rate of clinical chorioamnionitis (8.1% vs 14.7%, odds ratio, 0.51; P=.03) and a lower rate of peripartum infectious morbidity (8.1% vs 15.8%, odds ratio, 0.47; P=.02) compared to those who were Group B Streptococcus negative. Infants born to patients who were Group B Streptococcus positive were significantly less likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (3.4% vs 15.1%, P<.001). Conclusion Although Group B Streptococcus colonization has historically been considered a risk factor for clinical chorioamnionitis, in the era of universal antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus positive patients, our findings support the point that intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus positivity is associated with lower rates of clinical chorioamnionitis and peripartum infectious morbidity among patients undergoing induction with protocolized labor management. These findings demonstrate that intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus may protect against perinatal infectious morbidity, a phenomenon that warrants further investigation. Rectovaginal colonization with Group B Streptococcus during pregnancy has historically been shown to be associated with an increased risk of clinical chorioamnionitis and peripartum infectious morbidity. Newer observational data in the era of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis suggest a possible reversal of this association; however, it is unclear if this is related to differences in labor management for those with and without Group B Streptococcus colonization. We therefore sought to assess the association between intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus colonization and clinical chorioamnionitis within the context of a randomized induction of labor trial with a standardized labor protocol. We performed an exploratory secondary analysis of a randomized trial of patients undergoing term induction at a tertiary care center. Patients received third trimester Group B Streptococcus screening and intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis as routine care. Group B Streptococcus detection was performed using a carrot broth-enhanced subculture to Group B Streptococcus Detect approach (Hardy Diagnostics, Santa Maria, CA). Labor management was protocolized per the trial. Patients with unknown Group B Streptococcus status or who did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, if indicated, were excluded. The primary outcome was diagnosis of clinical chorioamnionitis, compared between patients who received intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for known Group B Streptococcus positive status (by culture, history, or Group B Streptococcus bacteriuria) and those who were Group B Streptococcus negative and did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis. Secondary outcomes included postpartum endometritis, wound infection, a composite maternal peripartum infectious morbidity, and neonatal outcomes. A total of 491 patients were enrolled in the trial. Of these, 466 had a known Group B Streptococcus status and received or did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis accordingly and were included in this analysis: 292 (62.7%) were Group B Streptococcus negative and did not receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, and 174 (37.3%) were Group B Streptococcus positive and received intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis. The majority of patients were Non-Hispanic Black (78.1%) and nulliparous (59.7%). There were no differences in demographic, clinical, induction or labor characteristics between groups. Patients who were Group B Streptococcus positive had a 49% lower rate of clinical chorioamnionitis (8.1% vs 14.7%, odds ratio, 0.51; P=.03) and a lower rate of peripartum infectious morbidity (8.1% vs 15.8%, odds ratio, 0.47; P=.02) compared to those who were Group B Streptococcus negative. Infants born to patients who were Group B Streptococcus positive were significantly less likely to be admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (3.4% vs 15.1%, P<.001). Although Group B Streptococcus colonization has historically been considered a risk factor for clinical chorioamnionitis, in the era of universal antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus positive patients, our findings support the point that intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus positivity is associated with lower rates of clinical chorioamnionitis and peripartum infectious morbidity among patients undergoing induction with protocolized labor management. These findings demonstrate that intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis for Group B Streptococcus may protect against perinatal infectious morbidity, a phenomenon that warrants further investigation.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
刚刚
执着的冬瓜完成签到,获得积分10
1秒前
1秒前
时尚小霜完成签到 ,获得积分10
1秒前
sisi发布了新的文献求助10
1秒前
shanshan完成签到,获得积分10
2秒前
所所应助光亮的冷亦采纳,获得10
2秒前
朱文韬发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
Wangrich完成签到,获得积分10
4秒前
英姑应助摆烂小子采纳,获得10
4秒前
没有熬夜发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
李爱国应助婷婷采纳,获得10
4秒前
在水一方应助烨无殇采纳,获得10
5秒前
5秒前
5秒前
所所应助wuqi采纳,获得10
5秒前
火星上牛青完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
5秒前
6秒前
6秒前
11111发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
铁臂阿童木完成签到,获得积分10
7秒前
曹智峰发布了新的文献求助10
9秒前
xiaoxiao1992完成签到,获得积分10
9秒前
XuNan完成签到,获得积分10
10秒前
10秒前
科研通AI6.2应助受伤觅柔采纳,获得10
10秒前
11秒前
11秒前
乐乐应助parpate采纳,获得10
11秒前
11秒前
ZJX发布了新的文献求助30
11秒前
毛子涵发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
qwe31533完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
12秒前
桐桐应助Easter采纳,获得10
12秒前
12秒前
sl完成签到,获得积分10
12秒前
sisi完成签到,获得积分20
12秒前
zjcbk985发布了新的文献求助10
12秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Kinesiophobia : a new view of chronic pain behavior 2000
Research for Social Workers 1000
Mastering New Drug Applications: A Step-by-Step Guide (Mastering the FDA Approval Process Book 1) 800
The Social Psychology of Citizenship 600
Signals, Systems, and Signal Processing 510
Discrete-Time Signals and Systems 510
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 生物 医学 工程类 计算机科学 有机化学 物理 生物化学 纳米技术 复合材料 内科学 化学工程 人工智能 催化作用 遗传学 数学 基因 量子力学 物理化学
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 5911786
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 6828175
关于积分的说明 15782998
捐赠科研通 5036618
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 2711346
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 1661646
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 1603788