Endomyometritis after cesarean delivery in the era of antibiotic prophylaxis: incidence and risk factors

References

• Burrows LJ, Meyn LA, Weber AM. Maternal morbidity associated with vaginal versus cesarean delivery. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:907–912.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chaim W, Bashiri A, Bar-David J, et al. Prevalence and clinical significance of postpartum endometritis and wound infection. Infect Dis Obstet Gynecol. 2000;8:77–82.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Declercq E, Barger M, Cabral HJ, et al. Maternal outcomes associated with planned primary cesarean births compared with planned vaginal births. Obstet Gynecol. 2007;109:669–677.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Practice Bulletins. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 74. Antibiotic prophylaxis for gynecologic procedures. Obstet Gynecol. 2006;108:225–234.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smaill FM, Grivell RM. Antibiotic prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis for preventing infection after cesarean section. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;10:CD007482.
   Google Scholar
• Hammad IA, Chauhan SP, Magann EF, Abuhamad AZ. Peripartum complications with cesarean delivery: a review of maternal-fetal medicine units network publications. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2014;27:463–474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamilton BE, Martin JA, Osterman MJ, et al. Births: final data for 2014. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2015;64:1–64.
   Google Scholar
• Olsen MA, Butler AM, Willers DM, et al. Comparison of costs of surgical site infection and endometritis after cesarean delivery using claims and medical record data. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31:872–875.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perencevich EN, Sands KE, Cosgrove SE, et al. Health and economic impact of surgical site infections diagnosed after hospital discharge. Emerg Infect Dis. 2003;9:196–203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) – a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform. 2009;42:377–381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ACOG Committee on Obstetric Practice. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 433: optimal goals for anesthesia care in obstetrics. Obstet Gynecol. 2009;113:1197–1199.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tran TS, Jamulitrat S, Chongsuvivatwong V, Geater A. Risk factors for postcesarean surgical site infection. Obstet Gynecol. 2000;95:367–371.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karim H, Chafik K, Karim K, et al. Risk factors for surgical wound infection in digestive surgery. Retrospective study of 3,000 surgical wounds. Tunis Med. 2000;78:634–640.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vamvakas EC, Carven JH. Transfusion of white-cell containing allogeneic blood components and postoperative wound infection: effect of confounding factors. Transfus Med. 1998;8:29–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor RW, O’Brien J, Trottier SJ, et al. Red blood cell transfusions and nosocomial infections in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:2302–2308; quiz 2309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shorr AF, Jackson WL. Transfusion practice and nosocomial infection: assessing the evidence. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2005;11:468–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson JL, Grossman BJ, Kleinman S, et al. Red blood cell transfusion: a clinical practice guideline from the AABB. Ann Intern Med. 2012;157:49–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Myles TD, Santolaya J. Maternal and neonatal outcomes in patients with a prolonged second stage of labor. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;102:52–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piper JM, Bolling DR, Newton ER. The second stage of labor: factors influencing duration. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1991;165:976–979.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maggio L, Nicolau DP, DaCosta M, et al. Cefazolin prophylaxis in obese women undergoing cesarean delivery: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;125:1205–1210.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmadzia HK, Patel EM, Joshi D, et al. Obstetric surgical site infections: 2 grams compared with 3 grams of cefazolin in morbidly obese women. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126:708–715.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swank ML, Wing DA, Nicolau DP, McNulty JA. Increased 3-gram cefazolin dosing for cesarean delivery prophylaxis in obese women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;213:415.e1–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bratzler DW, Dellinger EP, Olsen KM, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for antimicrobial prophylaxis in surgery. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013;70:195–283.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Oteo J, Aracil B, Alos JI, Gomez-Garces JL. High prevalence of resistance to clindamycin in Bacteroides fragilis group isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2000;45:691–693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachiewicz MP, Moulton LJ, Jaiyeoba O. Infection prevention and evaluation of fever after laparoscopic hysterectomy. JSLS. 2015;19:e2015.00065. doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2015.00065
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaumann R, Funke M, Janssen E, Rodloff AC. In vitro activities of clindamycin, imipenem, metronidazole, and piperacillin-tazobactam against susceptible and resistant isolates of Bacteroides fragilis evaluated by kill kinetics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:3413–3416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briody VA, Albright CM, Has P, Hughes BL. Use of cefazolin for group B streptococci prophylaxis in women reporting a penicillin allergy without anaphylaxis. Obstet Gynecol. 2016;127:577–583.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rours GI, Duijts L, Moll HA, et al. Chlamydia trachomatis infection during pregnancy associated with preterm delivery: a population-based prospective cohort study. Eur J Epidemiol. 2011;26:493–502.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wager GP, Martin DH, Koutsky L, et al. Puerperal infectious morbidity: relationship to route of delivery and to antepartum chlamydia trachomatis infection. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1980;138:1028–1033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• “2015 Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines”. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/std/tg2015/screening-recommendations.htm [last accessed 12 Nov 2016].
   Google Scholar