• G D T Inglis, L A Jardine, and M W Davies.
• Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Grantley Stable Neonatal Unit, Butterfield Street, Herston, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 4029. Garry_Inglis@health.qld.gov.au
• Cochrane Db Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18 (3): CD004338.

BackgroundIntubation is associated with bacterial colonisation of the respiratory tract and, therefore, may increase the risk of acquiring an infection. The infection may prolong the need for mechanical ventilation and increase the risk of chronic lung disease. The use of prophylactic antibiotics has been advocated for all mechanically ventilated newborns in order to reduce the risk of colonisation and the acquisition of infection. However, there is the possibility that the harm this may cause might outweigh the benefit.ObjectivesTo assess the effects of prophylactic antibiotics on mortality and morbidity in intubated, ventilated newborn infants who are not known to have infection. In separate comparisons, two different policies regarding the prophylactic use of antibiotics in intubated, ventilated infants were reviewed: 1) among infants who have been intubated for mechanical ventilation, a policy of prophylactic antibiotics for the duration of intubation versus placebo or no treatment 2) among intubated, ventilated infants who have been started on antibiotics at the time of intubation but whose initial cultures to rule out sepsis were negative, a policy of continuing versus discontinuing prophylactic antibiotics.Search StrategyMEDLINE (January 1950 to March 2007), CINAHL (1982 to March 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), the Cochrane Neonatal Group Specialised Register and reference lists of articles were searched.Selection CriteriaRandomised controlled trials of sufficient quality in which mechanically ventilated newborn infants are randomised to receive prophylactic antibiotics versus placebo or no treatment.Data Collection And AnalysisTwo reviewers independently assessed trial quality.Main ResultsTwo studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review. One was of insufficient quality to draw any meaningful conclusions. The other was of fair quality and found no significant differences between treatment and control groups in any of the reported outcomes, however, the rates of septicaemia were not reported.Authors' ConclusionsThere is insufficient evidence from randomised trials to support or refute the use of prophylactic antibiotics when starting mechanical ventilation in newborn infants, or to support or refute continuing antibiotics once initial cultures have ruled out infection in mechanically ventilated newborn infants.

11 keywords...

hide…