Use of chlorhexidine during labor: how effective against neonatal group B streptococci colonization?

What is the result of vaginal cleansing with chlorhexidine during labour on maternal and neonatal infections? A systematic review of randomised trials with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Infection with vaginal microorganisms during labour can lead to maternal and neonatal mortality and morbidity. The objective of this systematic review is to review the effectiveness of intrapartum vaginal chlorhexidine in the reduction of maternal and neonatal colonisation and infectious morbidity.

METHODS

Search strategy - Eight databases were searched for articles published in any language from inception to October 2016. Selection criteria - Randomised controlled trials were included. Data Collection and analysis - Publications were assessed for inclusion. Data were extracted and assessed for risk of bias. Relative risks from individual studies were pooled using a random effects model and the heterogeneity of treatment was evaluated using Chi2 and I2 tests.

RESULTS

Eleven randomised controlled trials (n = 20,101) evaluated intrapartum vaginal chlorhexidine interventions. Meta-analysis found no significant differences between the intervention and control groups for any of the four outcomes: maternal or neonatal colonization or infection. The preferred method for chlorhexidine administration was vaginal irrigation.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis did not demonstrate improved maternal or neonatal outcomes with intrapartum vaginal chlorhexidine cleansing, however this may be due to the limitations of the available studies. A larger, multicentre randomised controlled trial, powered to accurately evaluate the effect of intrapartum vaginal chlorhexidine cleansing on neonatal outcomes may still be informative; the technique of douching may be the most promising.

Vaginal chlorhexidine during labour to prevent early-onset neonatal group B streptococcal infection

BACKGROUND

Although early-onset group B β-hemolytic streptococcus (GBS) infection is rare, it accounts for approximately 30% of neonatal infections, has a high mortality rate, and is acquired through vertical transmission from colonized mothers. Several trials have demonstrated the efficacy of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) for preventing early-onset disease (EOD). Vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine during labour has been proposed as another strategy for preventing GBS EOD in the preterm and term neonate. Chlorhexidine has been found to have no impact on antibiotic resistance, is inexpensive, and applicable to poorly equipped delivery sites.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine during labour in women who are colonized with GBS for preventing early-onset GBS infection in preterm and term neonates.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 October 2014) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized trials comparing vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine (vaginal wash or gel/cream) versus placebo, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted the data and checked them for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new trials eligible for inclusion in this update. One study was moved from included to excluded studies from the previous version of the review. Four studies, including 1125 preterm and term infants, met the inclusion criteria and reported on at least one of the outcomes of interest. For the comparison chlorhexidine (vaginal wash or gel) versus placebo or no treatment, two studies (n = 987) were pooled. There was no statistically significant difference in early-onset GBS disease (sepsis and/or meningitis) comparing chlorhexidine (vaginal wash or gel/cream) versus placebo or no treatment; risk ratio (RR), 2.32 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 15.63); I-squared (I²) = 0% or in GBS pneumonia; RR 0.35 (95% CI 0.01 to 8.6); test for heterogeneity not applicable. The outcome of colonization of the neonate with GBS was reported in three studies (n = 328); RR 0.64 (95% CI 0.40 to 1.01; there was substantial between-study heterogeneity (Chi² = 3.19; P = 0.20; I² = 37%). Maternal mild side effects (stinging or local irritation) (three trials, 1066 women) were more commonly seen in women treated with chlorhexidine (RR 8.50 (95% CI 1.60 to 45.28); there was no heterogeneity (Chi² = 0.01, df = 1 (P = 0.91); I² = 0%). No side effects were reported among the neonates.For the comparison chlorhexidine vaginal wash verus mechanical washing with placebo or no treatment (one study, n = 79), there was a significant reduction in neonatal colonization with GBS; RR 0.32 (95% CI 0.12 to 0.90). Tests for heterogeneity not applicable. There were no other significant results for this comparison.For the comparison chlorhexidine gel or cream versus placebo or no treatment, there were no statistically significant results for the outcomes reported on.The quality of the trials varied and the overall risk of bias was rated as unclear or high. The quality of the evidence using GRADE was very low for the outcomes of the comparison chlorhexidine (vaginal wash or gel/cream) versus placebo or no treatment. These outcomes included: early-onset GBS disease (sepsis and/or meningitis), GBS pneumonia, neonatal colonization with GBS, neonatal mortality due to early-onset GBS infection and adverse (mild) effects in the mother and the neonate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the four included trials varied as did the risk of bias and the quality of the evidence using GRADE was very low. Vaginal chlorhexidine was not associated with reductions in any of the primary outcomes of early-onset GBS disease (sepsis and/or meningitis) or GBS pneumonia. Vaginal chlorhexidine may reduce GBS colonization of neonates. The intervention was associated with an increased risk of maternal mild adverse effects. The review currently does not support the use of vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine in labour for preventing early-onset disease. Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the studies was poor. As early-onset GBS disease is a rare condition trials with very large sample sizes are needed to assess the effectiveness of vaginal chlorhexidine to reduce its occurrence. In the era of intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis, such trials may be difficult to justify especially in developed countries.

Safety and impact of chlorhexidine antisepsis interventions for improving neonatal health in developing countries

Affordable, efficacious, and safe interventions to prevent infections and improve neonatal survival in low-resource settings are needed. Chlorhexidine is a broad-spectrum antiseptic that has been used extensively for many decades in hospital and other clinical settings. It has also been given as maternal vaginal lavage, full-body newborn skin cleansing, and/or umbilical cord cleansing to prevent infection in neonates. Recent evidence suggests that these chlorhexidine interventions may have significant public health impact on the burden of neonatal infection and mortality in developing countries. This review examines the available data from randomized and nonrandomized studies of chlorhexidine cleansing, with a primary focus on potential uses in low-resource settings. Safety issues related to chlorhexidine use in newborns are reviewed, and future research priorities for chlorhexidine interventions for neonatal health in developing countries are discussed. We conclude that maternal vaginal cleansing combined with newborn skin cleansing could reduce neonatal infections and mortality in hospitals of sub-Saharan Africa, but the individual impact of these interventions must be determined, particularly in community settings. There is evidence for a protective benefit of newborn skin and umbilical cord cleansing with chlorhexidine in the community in south Asia. Effectiveness trials in that region are required to address the feasibility of community-based delivery methods such as incorporating these interventions into clean birth kits or training programs for minimally skilled delivery assistants or family members. Efficacy trials for all chlorhexidine interventions are needed in low-resource settings in Africa, and the benefit of maternal vaginal cleansing beyond that provided by newborn skin cleansing needs to be determined.

Use of Vaginally Administered Chlorhexidine During Labor to Improve Pregnancy Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to determine the potential for chlorhexidine used as a vaginal and neonatal wash to reduce adverse outcomes of pregnancy, especially in developing countries.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the English literature from January 1950 through October 2005 for all articles related to the use of chlorhexidine.

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Every article on chlorhexidine use in pregnancy and in the newborn period was reviewed in detail. The results of every study in which chlorhexidine was used as a vaginal treatment, with or without a neonatal wash, for all pregnancy outcomes except mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus, are summarized in this review.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION AND RESULTS

Chlorhexidine is a highly effective killer of most bacteria, has an excellent safety profile, rarely is associated with bacterial resistance, is easy to administer, and costs a few cents per application. When used as a vaginal or newborn disinfectant, it clearly reduces bacterial load, including transmission of Group B Streptococcus from the mother to the fetus. Nevertheless, in developed countries, chlorhexidine generally has not been shown to significantly reduce life-threatening maternal or neonatal infections. However, 2 large but not randomized studies, one in Malawi and the other in Egypt, suggest that important reductions in maternal and neonatal sepsis and neonatal mortality may be achievable with vaginal or neonatal chlorhexidine treatment.

CONCLUSION

With 4 million neonates and about 700,000 pregnant or recently pregnant women-mostly in developing countries-dying each year, many from infections originating in the vagina, further study of this highly promising treatment is indicated.

Vaginal chlorhexidine during labour to prevent early-onset neonatal group B streptococcal infection

BACKGROUND

Early-onset group B beta-hemolytic streptococcus (GBS) infection accounts for approximately 30% of neonatal infections, has a high mortality rate and is acquired through vertical transmission from colonized mothers. Several trials have demonstrated the efficacy of intrapartum chemoprophylaxis (IPC) for preventing early-onset disease (EOD). Vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine during labour has been proposed as another strategy for preventing GBS EOD in the preterm and term neonate. Chlorhexidine has been found to have no impact on antibiotic resistance, is inexpensive, and applicable to poorly equipped delivery sites.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine during labour for preventing early-onset GBS infection in preterm and term neonates.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth trials register (October 2003), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 3, 2003), MEDLINE (1966 to October 2003), EMBASE (1980 to March 2003), CINAHL (1982 to March 2003) and LILACS (1982 to September 2003).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and quasi-randomized trials comparing vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine to placebo, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted information from the results sections of the included studies. We reported relative risk (RR) and risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated the number needed to treat (NNT) with 95% CIs when a statistically significant RD was found. We used a chi square test (chi2) and the I2 analysis to test for heterogeneity, and applied a fixed or random effects model accordingly.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies, including approximately 2190 term and preterm infants, met the inclusion criteria and reported on at least one of the outcomes of interest for this systematic review. When all studies were combined there was a statistically significant (p = 0.005) reduction in colonisation (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.91); RD -0.16 (95% CI -0.26 to -0.05); NNT 6 (95% CI 4 to 20). There was no statistically significant between-study heterogeneity. There was no statistically significant between-study heterogeneity both for RR (chi(2) = 3.21 [p = 0.2], I(2) = 37.8%) and for RD (chi(2) = 1.66 [p = 0.44], I(2) = 0%). There was no statistically significant reduction in EOD including GBS infection, GBS pneumonia, GBS meningitis or mortality.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Vaginal chlorhexidine resulted in a statistically significant reduction in GBS colonisation of neonates, but was not associated with reductions in other outcomes. The review currently does not support the use of vaginal disinfection with chlorhexidine in labour for preventing EOD. Results should be interpreted with caution as the methodological quality of the studies was poor.