Gidiri M F, Ziruma A
Academic Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Zimbabwe College of Health Sciences, Parirenyatwa Hospital and Mbuya Nehanda Maternity Hospital , Avondale, Harare , Zimbabwe.
J Obstet Gynaecol. 2014 Feb;34(2):160-4. doi: 10.3109/01443615.2013.832737.
The evidence that perioperative antibiotics for caesarean delivery are effective in reducing infective morbidity is unequivocal. In developing countries, especially those with high HIV-prevalence, clinicians have increasingly become anxious about the efficacy of perioperative antibiotics, hence the adoption of treatment regimens, as described in this study. We set out to investigate if these fears have a basis by conducting a randomised clinical trial. The setting was two tertiary units in a developing country with a significant HIV-prevalence. The outcome measures assessed were: pyrexia, wound infection, admission with puerperal sepsis, laparotomy for pelvic abscess and duration of hospital stay. There was no statistically significant difference between the two arms of the study with regard to the above outcomes. Our conclusion is that the two antibiotic regimens are equivalent in preventing infection, therefore there is no justification for subjecting patients to week-long antibiotics and the unnecessary increase in nurse workload.
剖宫产围手术期使用抗生素可有效降低感染性发病率,这一证据是明确的。在发展中国家,尤其是那些艾滋病毒高流行率的国家,临床医生越来越担心围手术期抗生素的疗效,因此采用了本研究中描述的治疗方案。我们通过开展一项随机临床试验来调查这些担忧是否有依据。研究地点为一个艾滋病毒高流行率的发展中国家的两个三级医疗单位。评估的结局指标包括:发热、伤口感染、产褥期败血症入院、盆腔脓肿剖腹手术以及住院时间。在上述结局方面,研究的两组之间没有统计学上的显著差异。我们的结论是,两种抗生素治疗方案在预防感染方面等效,因此让患者接受为期一周的抗生素治疗以及不必要地增加护士工作量是没有道理的。