Should we give antibiotics to neonates with mild non-progressive symptoms? A comparison of serial clinical observation and the neonatal sepsis risk calculator.

Objective: To compare two strategies [the neonatal sepsis risk calculator (NSC) and the updated serial clinical observation approach (SCO)] for the management of asymptomatic neonates at risk of early-onset sepsis (EOS) and neonates with mild non-progressive symptoms in the first hours of life. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study conducted over 15 months (01/01/2019-31/03/2020). All live births at ≥34 weeks of gestation were included. Infants were managed using SCO and decisions were compared with those retrospectively projected by the NSC. The proportion of infants recommended for antibiotics or laboratory testing was compared in both strategies. McNemar's non-parametric test was used to assess significant differences in matched proportions. Results: Among the 3,445 neonates (late-preterm, n = 178; full-term, n = 3,267) 262 (7.6%) presented with symptoms of suspected EOS. There were no cases of culture-proven EOS. Only 1.9% of the neonates were treated with antibiotics (median antibiotic treatment, 2 days) and 4.0% were evaluated. According to NSC, antibiotics would have been administered in 5.4% of infants (absolute difference between SCO and NSC, 3.51%; 95% CI, 3.14-3.71%; p <0.0001) and 5.6% of infants would have undergone "rule out sepsis" (absolute difference between SCO and NSC, 1.63%, 95% CI 1.10-2.05; p <0.0001). Conclusion: SCO minimizes laboratory testing and unnecessary antibiotics in infants at risk of EOS or with mild non-progressive symptoms, without the risk of a worse neonatal outcome. The NSC recommends almost three times more antibiotics than the SCO without improving neonatal outcomes.

Pneumococcal septic shock after neonatal respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis: A case report and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Bronchiolitis is a common cause of hospitalisation of infants less than a year old, with most infants recovering without complications. Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of bronchiolitis. Antimicrobial stewardship programmes do not recommend antibiotics for viral infections in neonates unless documented evidence of secondary bacterial infection is present. CASE REPORT: We present the case of a 7-day-old infant admitted to hospital with chest retractions and fever. The baby was hospitalised, empirical antibiotic therapy was administered, and non-invasive ventilation was started. When the viral aetiology was identified and clinical conditions improved, antibiotics were discontinued. However, after 48 hours, the newborn's condition worsened because of pneumococcal septic shock. Intravenous fluids, catecholamine support, and wide-spectrum antibiotics were administered. Non-invasive ventilation was re-started and continued until the full recovery. CONCLUSIONS: There is increasing evidence that RSV and S. pneumoniae co-infect and interact with each other, thus increasing respiratory diseases' severity. We provide a brief overview of the main international guidelines for managing bronchiolitis. Guidelines suggest avoidance of antibiotics use when the diagnosis of viral bronchiolitis is confirmed. We discuss the uncertainties regarding antibiotic use, especially in younger infants, who are more exposed to risks of bacterial superinfection.

Risk factors for group B streptococcus early-onset disease: an Italian, area-based, case-control study.

Purpose: Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) prevents group B streptococcus (GBS) early-onset disease (EOD). No European study evaluates the relative impact of risk factors (RFs) for EOD after a screening-based strategy and widespread IAP use We aimed to evaluate the risks of EOD in an Italian region where a screening-based strategy for preventing EOD was implemented.Materials and methods: Cases of EOD born at or above 35 weeks' gestation were reviewed and matched with controls.Results: There were 109 cases of EOD among 532,154 live births. Most cases had negative GBS prenatal screening (56/91, 61.5%) and were unexposed to IAP (86/109, 78.9%). At multivariate analysis, GBS bacteriuria (OR = 6.99), positive prenatal screening (OR = 13.7) and maternal intrapartum fever (OR = 188.3) were associated with an increased risk of EOD, whereas intrapartum beta-lactam antibiotics were associated with a decreased risk of EOD (≥4 h: OR = 0.008; <4 h: OR = 0.04). Neonates born to nonfebrile, GBS positive pregnant women, receiving beta-lactam antibiotics had very low probability of EOD, particularly if IAP was adequate.Conclusions: GBS positive prenatal screening, GBS bacteriuria and intrapartum fever are associated with EOD. Intrapartum beta-lactam antibiotics reduce the probability of EOD in neonates born to nonfebrile mothers.

Intrapartum beta-lactam antibiotics for preventing group B streptococcal early-onset disease: can we abandon the concept of 'inadequate' intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis?

Introduction: Neonatal sepsis remains a serious and potentially fatal illness. Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) prevents group B streptococcal (GBS) early-onset sepsis. The optimal duration of IAP (adequate IAP) to reduce vertical transmission of GBS has been debated. Understanding the mechanism of action of IAP may help in minimizing neonatal evaluation and unnecessary antibiotic use.Areas covered: In recent years, several studies on pharmacokinetics and clinical use of IAP have been published. Although penicillin and ampicillin are the most preferred antibiotics, the clinical efficacy of non-beta-lactam antibiotics, including clindamycin and vancomycin, used in cases of penicillin anaphylaxis-associated allergy, remains debatable. This is a narrative review of the literature regarding the impact of 'inadequate' IAP on the clinical management of women and newborns.Expert opinion: Recent evidence suggests that 'inadequate' IAP with beta-lactams is more effective in preventing vertical transmission of GBS than previously thought. Newborns exposed to intrapartum beta-lactams and who are asymptomatic at birth are likely uninfected, irrespective of IAP duration before delivery. Hence, we may abandon the concept of 'inadequate' IAP with beta-lactams in early-onset GBS sepsis, relying primarily on clinical signs observed at birth for managing IAP-exposed neonates.

Serial physical examinations, a simple and reliable tool for managing neonates at risk for early-onset sepsis.

AIM: To investigate whether serial physical examinations (SPEs) are a safe tool for managing neonates at risk for early-onset sepsis (EOS). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of neonates (≥ 34 wks' gestation) delivered in three high-volume level IIIbirthing centres in Emilia-Romagna (Italy) during a 4-mo period (from September 1 to December 31, 2015). Neonates at risk for EOS were managed according to the SPEs strategy, these were carried out in turn by bedside nursing staff and physicians. A standardized form detailing general wellbeing, skin colour and vital signs was filled in and signed at standard intervals (at age 3, 6, 12, 18, 36 and 48 h) in neonates at risk for EOS. Three independent reviewers reviewed all charts of neonates and abstracted data (gestational age, mode of delivery, group B streptococcus status, risk factors for EOS, duration of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, postpartum evaluations, therapies and outcome). Rates of sepsis workups, empirical antibiotics and outcome of neonates at-risk (or not) for EOS were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 2092 live births and 1 culture-proven EOS (Haemophilus i) (incidence rates of 0.48/1000 live births). Most newborns with signs of illness (51 out of 101, that is 50.5%), and most of those who received postpartum antibiotics (17 out of 29, that is 58.6%) were not at risk for EOS. Compared to neonates at risk, neonates not at risk for EOS were less likely to have signs of illness (51 out of 1442 vs 40 out of 650, P = 0.009) or have a sepsis workup (25 out of 1442 vs 28 out of 650, P < 0.001). However, they were not less likely to receive empirical antibiotics (17 out of 1442 vs 12 out of 650, P = 0.3). Thirty-two neonates were exposed to intrapartum fever or chorioamnionitis: 62.5% (n = 20) had a sepsis workup and 21.9% (n = 7) were given empirical antibiotics. Among 216 neonates managed through the SPEs strategy, only 5.6% (n = 12) had subsequently a sepsis workup and only 1.9% (n = 4) were given empirical antibiotics. All neonates managed through SPEs had a normal outcome. Among 2092 neonates, only 1.6% (n = 34) received antibiotics; 1.4% (n = 29) were ill and 0.2% (n = 5) were asymptomatic (they were treated because of risk factors for EOS). CONCLUSION: The SPEs strategy reduces unnecessary laboratory evaluations and antibiotics, and apparently does not worsen the outcome of neonates at-risk or neonates with mild, equivocal, transient symptoms.