Prophylactic systemic antibiotics to reduce morbidity and mortality in neonates with central venous catheters.

BACKGROUND: The use of central venous catheters is recognised as a risk factor for nosocomial infection. Prophylactic antibiotics may be effective in preventing catheter-related blood stream infection in newborns but may also have the undesirable effect of promoting the emergence of resistant strains of micro-organisms. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of prophylactic antibiotics on mortality and morbidity in neonates with central venous catheters. SEARCH STRATEGY: Searches were done of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE from 1950 to April 2007, CINAHL from 1982 to April 2007, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 2 2007). Previous reviews (including cross references) were also searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised controlled trials of adequate quality in which either individual newborn infants or clusters of infants were randomised to receive prophylactic antibiotics (not including antifungals) versus placebo or no treatment. Infants must have had central venous catheters, been full term infants less than 28 days old or preterm infants up to 44 weeks (postmenstrual) corrected age. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Criteria and methods used to assess the methodological quality of the trials: standard methods of the Cochrane Collaboration and its Neonatal Review Group were used. The review authors extracted data independently. Attempts were made to contact study investigators for additional information as required. MAIN RESULTS: Three small studies have been included in this review. Prophylactic antibiotics in neonates with central venous catheters had no effect on overall mortality (typical RR 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.31, 1.51). Prophylactic antibiotics in neonates with central venous catheters decreased the rate of proven bacterial sepsis (typical RR 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.18, 0.82). Prophylactic antibiotics in neonates with central venous catheters decreased the rate of suspected or proven bacterial septicaemia (typical RR 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.20, 0.78). No resistant organisms colonising infants were identified in any of the studies. No pooled data were available for other important outcome measures such as chronic lung disease or neurodevelopmental outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic systemic antibiotics in neonates with a central venous catheter reduces the rate of proven or suspected septicaemia. However, this may not be clinically important in the face of no significant difference in overall mortality and the lack of data on long-term neurodevelopmental outcome. Furthermore, there is a lack of data pertaining to the potentially significant disadvantages of this approach such as the selection of resistant organisms. The routine use of prophylactic antibiotics in infants with central venous catheters in neonatal units cannot currently be recommended.

Prophylactic antibiotics to reduce morbidity and mortality in neonates with umbilical artery catheters.

BACKGROUND: Umbilical artery catheters are often used in unwell neonates. Infection related to the use of these catheters may cause significant morbidity and mortality. The use of prophylactic antibiotics has been advocated for all newborns with umbilical artery catheters in order to reduce the risk of colonisation and acquired infection. Countering this is the possibility that harm, such as the emergence of antibiotic resistant organisms, may outweigh benefit. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess whether prophylactic antibiotics reduce mortality and morbidity in neonates with umbilical artery catheters. Two different policies regarding the prophylactic use of antibiotics in neonates with umbilical artery catheters were reviewed: 1) a policy of prophylactic antibiotics for the duration of catheterisation (or other fixed duration of antibiotic treatment) versus placebo or no treatment among neonates with umbilical artery catheters; 2) a policy of continuing versus discontinuing prophylactic antibiotics among neonates with umbilical artery catheters who had been started on antibiotics at the time of catheterisation but whose initial cultures to rule out sepsis are negative. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE (January 1950 to May 2007), CINAHL (1982 to May 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, 2007), the Cochrane Neonatal Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and some non-randomised (i.e., quasi-randomised trials) controlled trials of adequate quality in which newborn infants with umbilical artery catheters are randomised to receive prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewer authors independently assessed trial quality. MAIN RESULTS: Two quasi-randomised trials have been included. However, given their poor quality, we have not pooled the results. There were no statistically significant differences in important outcomes in either study. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the use of prophylactic antibiotics when umbilical artery catheters are inserted in newborn infants, and no evidence to support or refute continuing antibiotics once initial cultures rule out infection in newborn infants with umbilical artery catheters.

Prophylactic antibiotics to reduce morbidity and mortality in ventilated newborn infants.

BACKGROUND: Intubation is associated with bacterial colonisation of the respiratory tract and, therefore, may increase the risk of acquiring an infection. The infection may prolong the need for mechanical ventilation and increase the risk of chronic lung disease. The use of prophylactic antibiotics has been advocated for all mechanically ventilated newborns in order to reduce the risk of colonisation and the acquisition of infection. However, there is the possibility that the harm this may cause might outweigh the benefit. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of prophylactic antibiotics on mortality and morbidity in intubated, ventilated newborn infants who are not known to have infection. In separate comparisons, two different policies regarding the prophylactic use of antibiotics in intubated, ventilated infants were reviewed: 1) among infants who have been intubated for mechanical ventilation, a policy of prophylactic antibiotics for the duration of intubation versus placebo or no treatment 2) among intubated, ventilated infants who have been started on antibiotics at the time of intubation but whose initial cultures to rule out sepsis were negative, a policy of continuing versus discontinuing prophylactic antibiotics. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE (January 1950 to March 2007), CINAHL (1982 to March 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), the Cochrane Neonatal Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles were searched. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of sufficient quality in which mechanically ventilated newborn infants are randomised to receive prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. MAIN RESULTS: Two studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review. One was of insufficient quality to draw any meaningful conclusions. The other was of fair quality and found no significant differences between treatment and control groups in any of the reported outcomes, however, the rates of septicaemia were not reported. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the use of prophylactic antibiotics when starting mechanical ventilation in newborn infants, or to support or refute continuing antibiotics once initial cultures have ruled out infection in mechanically ventilated newborn infants.

Prophylactic antibiotics to reduce morbidity and mortality in neonates with umbilical venous catheters.

BACKGROUND: Umbilical venous catheters are often used in unwell neonates. Infection related to the use of these catheters may cause significant morbidity and mortality. The use of prophylactic antibiotics has been advocated for newborns with umbilical venous catheters in order to reduce the risk of colonisation and acquired infection. Countering this is the possibility that harm may outweigh benefit. Prophylactic antibiotics may be effective in preventing catheter-related blood stream infection, but may have the undesirable effect of promoting the emergence of resistant strains of micro-organisms. A policy of prophylactic antibiotic use should take into account this possibility, and has been used as a basis for arguing against its implementation. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess whether prophylactic antibiotics, in neonates with umbilical venous catheters, reduce mortality and morbidity. In separate comparisons, we planned to review two different policies regarding the prophylactic use of antibiotics in neonates with umbilical venous catheters: 1) Among neonates with umbilical venous catheters, a policy of prophylactic antibiotics for the duration of catheterisation (or other fixed duration of antibiotic treatment) versus placebo or no treatment; 2) Among neonates with umbilical venous catheters who had been started on antibiotics at the time of catheterisation, but whose initial cultures to rule out sepsis are negative, a policy of continuing versus discontinuing prophylactic antibiotics. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE (January 1966 to April 2005), CINAHL (1982 to April 2005), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials in which newborn infants with umbilical venous catheters are randomised to receive prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. MAIN RESULTS: One study, of poor quality, met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Twenty-nine term infants, who had umbilical venous catheters inserted specifically for transfusion procedures for hyperbilirubinaemia or polycythaemia, allocated non-randomly (quasi-randomised - alternate allocation) to treatment (n = 15) or control (n = 14) groups. Those in the treatment group received penicillin and gentamicin for three days. 5/15 infants given antibiotics and 5/14 control infants having positive blood cultures three days after catheter insertion. All positive blood cultures were considered contaminated, due to lack of corroborating clinical and haematological evidence of infection. Therefore, no infants were identified with evidence of septicaemia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the use of prophylactic antibiotics when umbilical venous catheters are inserted in newborn infants. There is no evidence to support or refute continuing antibiotics once initial cultures rule out infection in newborn infants with umbilical venous catheters.

Prophylactic antibiotics to reduce morbidity and mortality in neonates with umbilical artery catheters.

BACKGROUND: Umbilical artery catheters are often used in unwell neonates. Infection related to the use of these catheters may cause significant morbidity and mortality. The use of prophylactic antibiotics has been advocated for all newborns with umbilical artery catheters in order to reduce the risk of colonisation and acquired infection. Countering this is the possibility that harm may outweigh benefit. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to assess whether prophylactic antibiotics, in neonates with umbilical artery catheters, reduce mortality and morbidity. In separate comparisons, we planned to review two different policies regarding the prophylactic use of antibiotics in neonates with umbilical artery catheters: 1) among neonates with umbilical artery catheters, a policy of prophylactic antibiotics for the duration of catheterisation (or other fixed duration of antibiotic treatment) versus placebo or no treatment; 2) among neonates with umbilical artery catheters who had been started on antibiotics at the time of catheterisation but whose initial cultures to rule out sepsis are negative, a policy of continuing versus discontinuing prophylactic antibiotics. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE (January 1966 to February 2004), CINAHL (1982 to February 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2004), the Cochrane Neonatal Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of adequate quality in which newborn infants with umbilical artery catheters are randomised to receive prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality. MAIN RESULTS: No study met the criteria for inclusion in this review. REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the use of prophylactic antibiotics when umbilical artery catheters are inserted in newborn infants, or to support or refute continuing antibiotics once initial cultures rule out infection in newborn infants with umbilical artery catheters.