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.


OBJECTIVE
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.


METHODS
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).


METHODS
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.


METHODS
Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality.


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.


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.
Inglis
G D T
GD
McMaster University, Department of Pediatrics, 1200 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8N 3Z5. inglisgd@mcmaster.ca
Davies
M W
MW
D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D019072:Antibiotic Prophylaxis; D002406:Catheterization, Peripheral / Q000009:adverse effects*; D002408:Catheters, Indwelling / Q000009:adverse effects; D003428:Cross Infection / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D006801:Humans; D007226:Infant Mortality; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D016032:Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; D014471:Umbilical Veins
D000900:Anti-Bacterial Agents