These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Etiology and treatment of post-cesarean-section endometritis after cephalosporin prophylaxis.
    Author: Hillier S, Watts DH, Lee MF, Eschenbach DA.
    Journal: J Reprod Med; 1990 Mar; 35(3 Suppl):322-8. PubMed ID: 2181119.
    Abstract:
    To describe the microbiologic etiology of post-cesarean endometritis developing after perioperative cephalosporin prophylaxis, endometrial samples were obtained from 27 women with a triple-lumen catheter. The women were assigned in a double-blind, randomized fashion to receive either ticarcillin/clavulanate, 3.1 g, or cefoxitin, 2 g, administered every six hours, until the clinical signs of infection resolved. A total of 149 microorganisms (84 facultative and 65 obligate anaerobes) were recovered from 26 women, for a mean of 5.5 isolates per specimen. One endometrial specimen was sterile. Bacteroides and Peptostreptococcus species were the most frequent isolates, followed by Gardnerella vaginalis, Enterococcus, facultative gram-negative rods and Mycoplasma hominis. Each of the isolates was tested for beta-lactamase activity. At least one beta-lactamase-producing isolate was recovered from 56% of the specimens. Susceptibility testing of endometrial isolates demonstrated that 96% of 118 potential pathogens (Gardnerella, Bacteroides, Peptostreptococcus, enterococci and streptococci) were susceptible to ticarcillin/clavulanate. By comparison, 86% of these isolates were susceptible to cefoxitin in vitro. Women who were treated with ticarcillin/clavulanate were less likely to have a temperature greater than 38 degrees C for two or more days (8% vs. 57%, P = .01). Also, there was a trend toward a decreased duration of uterine tenderness in the ticarcillin/clavulanate group, but it did not attain statistical significance (60% vs. 86%, P = .4). However, the overall clinical success rate with these single-agent treatments was not different for the two groups (77% vs. 79%, P = 1.0).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]