Which antiseptic to use for a caesarean section? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Guidelines for pre-operative skin antisepsis recommend using chlorhexidine in an alcohol-based solution. However, other antiseptics such as aqueous povidone-iodine or alcohol-based solutions continue to be used. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in caesarean section are rare and do not include all possible comparisons of antiseptics. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy (reduction of surgical site infections) of chlorhexidine at two different concentrations (0.3% and 2%) and povidone-iodine in aqueous or alcohol-based solutions using a network meta-analysis, including only RCTs of caesarean sections. Fragility indices and prediction intervals were also estimated. A systematic literature review and network meta-analysis were performed. RCTs published up to February 2024 were collected from PubMed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library. Interventions included alcohol-based povidone-iodine, aqueous povidone-iodine, and alcohol-based chlorhexidine 2% and 0.3%. The primary outcome measure was surgical site infection. Nine RCTs with 4915 patients and four interventions were included in the network meta-analysis. All credible intervals of the compared interventions overlapped. Alcohol-based 2% chlorhexidine had the highest probability of being effective in preventing surgical site infections, followed by alcohol-based povidone-iodine. The fragility index ranged from 4 to 18. The prediction intervals were wide. On the basis of rank probabilities, chlorhexidine 2% in an alcohol-based solution was most likely to be effective in preventing surgical site infections after caesarean section, followed by alcohol-based povidone-iodine. Given the paucity of literature and the relatively small difference between povidone-iodine and chlorhexidine found in our meta-analysis, we suggest that either can be used in an alcohol-based solution as antisepsis for planned or emergency caesarean section.

Association between SARS-Cov-2 infection during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes: A re-analysis of the data reported by Wei et al. (2021).

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND: Wei et al. have published a meta-analysis (MA), which aimed to evaluate the association between SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy and adverse pregnancy outcomes. Using classical random-effects model, they found that SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with preeclampsia, preterm birth and stillbirth. Performing MA with low event rates or with few studies may be challenging insofar as MA relies on several within and between-study distributional assumptions. The objective was to assess the robustness of the results provided by Wei et al. METHODS: We performed a sensitivity analysis using frequentist and Bayesian meta-analysis methods. We also estimated fragility indexes. RESULTS: For eclampsia, the confidence intervals of most frequentist models contain 1. All beta-binomial models (Bayesian) lead to credible intervals containing 1. The prediction interval, based on DL method, ranges from 0.75 to 2.38. The fragility index is 2 for the DL method. For preterm, the confidence (credible) intervals exclude 1. The prediction interval is broad, ranging from 0.84 to 20.61. The fragility index ranges from 27 to 10. For stillbirth, the confidence intervals of most frequentist models contain 1. Six Bayesian MA models lead to credible intervals containing 1. The prediction interval ranges from 0.52 to 8.49. The fragility index is 3. CONCLUSION: Given the available data and the results of our broad sensitivity analysis, we can suggest that SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy is associated with preterm, and that it may be associated with preeclampsia. For stillbirth, more data are needed as none of the Bayesian analyses are conclusive.