Talk:Abnormal Development - Gonorrhea
|About Discussion Pages|
Cite this page: Hill, M.A. (2019, April 23) Embryology Abnormal Development - Gonorrhea. Retrieved from https://embryology.med.unsw.edu.au/embryology/index.php/Talk:Abnormal_Development_-_Gonorrhea
Preventing ophthalmia neonatorum
Paediatr Child Health. 2015 Mar;20(2):93-6.
Moore DL, MacDonald NE; Canadian Paediatric Society, Infectious Diseases and Immunization Committee.
Abstract in English, French The use of silver nitrate as prophylaxis for neonatal ophthalmia was instituted in the late 1800s to prevent the devastating effects of neonatal ocular infection with Neisseria gonorrhoeae. At that time - during the preantibiotic era - many countries made such prophylaxis mandatory by law. Today, neonatal gonococcal ophthalmia is rare in Canada, but ocular prophylaxis for this condition remains mandatory in some provinces/ territories. Silver nitrate drops are no longer available and erythromycin, the only ophthalmic antibiotic eye ointment currently available for use in newborns, is of questionable efficacy. Ocular prophylaxis is not effective in preventing chlamydial conjunctivitis. Applying medication to the eyes of newborns may result in mild eye irritation and has been perceived by some parents as interfering with mother-infant bonding. Physicians caring for newborns should advocate for rescinding mandatory ocular prophylaxis laws. More effective means of preventing ophthalmia neonatorum include screening all pregnant women for gonorrhea and chlamydia infection, and treatment and follow-up of those found to be infected. Mothers who were not screened should be tested at delivery. Infants of mothers with untreated gonococcal infection at delivery should receive ceftriaxone. Infants exposed to chlamydia at delivery should be followed closely for signs of infection. KEYWORDS: Chlamydia; Gonococcus; Neonatal ophthalmia; Prophylaxis; STIs; Screening in pregnancy
Maternal self-reported genital tract infections during pregnancy and the risk of selected birth defects
Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol. 2011 Feb;91(2):108-16. doi: 10.1002/bdra.20749. Epub 2010 Dec 7.
Carter TC, Olney RS, Mitchell AA, Romitti PA, Bell EM, Druschel CM; National Birth Defects Prevention Study. Source Division of Epidemiology, Statistics, and Prevention Research, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health/DHHS, 6100 Executive Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. email@example.com
BACKGROUND: Genital tract infections are common during pregnancy and can result in adverse outcomes including preterm birth and neonatal infection. This hypothesis-generating study examined whether these infections are associated with selected birth defects.
METHODS: We conducted a case-control study of 5913 children identified as controls and 12,158 cases with birth defects from the National Birth Defects Prevention Study (1997-2004). Maternal interviews provided data on genital tract infections that occurred from one month before pregnancy through the end of the first trimester. Infections were either grouped together as a single overall exposure or were considered as a subgroup that included chlamydia/gonorrhea/pelvic inflammatory disease. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using unconditional logistic regression with adjustment for potential confounders.
RESULTS: Genital tract infections were associated with bilateral renal agenesis/hypoplasia (OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.11-7.50), cleft lip with or without cleft palate (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.03-2.06), and transverse limb deficiency (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.04-3.26). Chlamydia/gonorrhea/pelvic inflammatory disease was associated with cleft lip only (OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.39-5.69). These findings were not statistically significant after adjustment for multiple comparisons.
CONCLUSIONS: Caution is needed in interpreting these findings due to the possible misclassification of infection, the limited sample size that constrained consideration of the effects of treatment, and the possibility of chance associations. Although these data do not provide strong evidence for an association between genital tract infections and birth defects, additional research on the possible effects of these relatively common infections is needed.
Copyright © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.