OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this prospective study was to determine whether the timing of prophylactic antibiotics at cesarean delivery influences maternal/neonatal infectious morbidity. STUDY DESIGN: In this double-blind placebo-controlled trial, cefazolin was given at skin incision (group A) or at cord clamping (group B). Patients were eligible for the trial if they had labored and required a cesarean delivery. RESULTS: Over a 30-month period 303 patients with singleton pregnancies entered the trial; 153-group A, 149-group B. Demographics, indication for cesarean delivery (P = .54), and operative time (P = .999), as well as rates of endometritis (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42-1.07), wound infection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.45-1.55), neonatal sepis (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.91-1.79), and NICU admissions (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.91-1.79) were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in maternal infectious morbidity whether antibiotics were given before skin incision or at cord clamping.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this prospective study was to determine whether the timing of prophylactic antibiotics at cesarean delivery influences maternal/neonatal infectious morbidity. STUDY DESIGN: In this double-blind placebo-controlled trial, cefazolin was given at skin incision (group A) or at cord clamping (group B). Patients were eligible for the trial if they had labored and required a cesarean delivery. RESULTS: Over a 30-month period 303 patients with singleton pregnancies entered the trial; 153-group A, 149-group B. Demographics, indication for cesarean delivery (P = .54), and operative time (P = .999), as well as rates of endometritis (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42-1.07), wound infection (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.45-1.55), neonatal sepis (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.91-1.79), and NICU admissions (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.91-1.79) were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in maternal infectious morbidity whether antibiotics were given before skin incision or at cord clamping.
Authors: William P Goins; Thomas R Talbot; William Schaffner; Kathryn M Edwards; Allen S Craig; Stephanie J Schrag; Melissa K Van Dyke; Marie R Griffin Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Amy E Doss; Jennifer D Davidson; Suzanne P Cliver; Luisa A L Wetta; William W Andrews; Alan T N Tita Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2012-05-03
Authors: R F Lamont; J D Sobel; J P Kusanovic; E Vaisbuch; S Mazaki-Tovi; S K Kim; N Uldbjerg; R Romero Journal: BJOG Date: 2011-01 Impact factor: 6.531
Authors: Said Aboud; Gernard Msamanga; Jennifer S Read; Lei Wang; Chelu Mfalila; Usha Sharma; Francis Martinson; Taha E Taha; Robert L Goldenberg; Wafaie W Fawzi Journal: Int J Gynaecol Obstet Date: 2009-08-28 Impact factor: 3.561
Authors: Alan T N Tita; Jeff M Szychowski; Kim Boggess; George Saade; Sherri Longo; Erin Clark; Sean Esplin; Kirsten Cleary; Ron Wapner; Kellett Letson; Michelle Owens; Adi Abramovici; Namasivayam Ambalavanan; Gary Cutter; William Andrews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mohammed H Elkomy; Pervez Sultan; David R Drover; Ekaterina Epshtein; Jeffery L Galinkin; Brendan Carvalho Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2014-04-14 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Alan T N Tita; Dwight J Rouse; Sean Blackwell; George R Saade; Catherine Y Spong; William W Andrews Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 7.661