Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Programas de cribado y tratamiento de infecciones del aparato genital inferior para la prevención del parto prematuro

Contraer todo Desplegar todo

Referencias

Referencias de los estudios incluidos en esta revisión

Kiss 2004 {published data only}

Kiss H, Petricevic L, Husslein P. Prospective randomised controlled trial of an infection screening programme to reduce the rate of preterm delivery. BMJ 2004;329:371.
Kiss H, Pichler E, Petricevic L, Husslein P. Cost effectiveness of a screen‐and‐treat program for asymptomatic vaginal infections in pregnancy: towards a significant reduction in the costs of prematurity. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology 2006;127(2):198‐203.

Referencias de los estudios excluidos de esta revisión

Gjerdingen 2000 {published data only}

Gjerdinjen D, Fontaine P, Bixby M, Santilli J, Welsh J. The impact of regular vaginal pH screening on the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy. Journal of Family Practice 2000;49:39‐43.

Gupta 2013 {published data only}

Gupta S, Tripathi R, Singh N, Bhalla P, Ramji S, Mala YM. Pregnancy outcome in asymptomatic women with abnormal vaginal flora without any treatment and after treatment with vaginal clindamycin and clotrimazole: a randomised controlled trial. South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 2013;19(2):35‐8.

McGregor 1995 {published data only}

McGregor JA, French JI, Parker R, Draper D, Patterson E, Jones W, et al. Prevention of premature birth by screening and treatment for common genital tract infections: results of a prospective controlled evaluation. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1995;173(1):157‐67. [MEDLINE: 7631673]

Sungkar 2012 {published data only}

Sungkar A. Early self‐diagnosis and treatment of bacterial vaginosis to prevent preterm premature rupture of membranes. Journal of Perinatal Medicine 2013;41(Suppl 1):171.
Sungkar A, Purwosunu Y, Aziz MF, Pratomo H, Sutrisna B, Sekizawa A. Influence of early self‐diagnosis and treatment of bacterial vaginosis on preterm birth rate. International Journal of Gynecology and Obstetrics 2012;117(3):264‐7.

Amsel 1983

Amsel R, Totten PA, Spiegel CA, Chen KC, Eschenbach D, Holmes KK. Nonspecific vaginitis. Diagnostic criteria and microbial and epidemiologic associations. American Journal of Medicine 1983;74:14‐22. [MEDLINE: 6600371]

Bejar 1981

Bejar R, Curbelo V, Davi SC, Gluck L. Premature labour bacterial sources of phospholipase. Obstetrics & Gynecology 1981;57(4):479‐82. [MEDLINE: 7017516]

Black 1997

Black CM. Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 1997;10:160–84. [MEDLINE: 8993862]

Borchardt 1991

Borchardt KA, Smith RF. An evaluation of an InPouchTMTV culture method for diagnosing Trichomonas vaginalis infection. Genitourinary Medicine 1991;67(2):149‐52. [MEDLINE: 2032710]

Brocklehurst 1998

Brocklehurst P, Rooney G. Interventions for treating genital chlamydia trachomatis infection in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 1998, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000054]

Brocklehurst 2002

Brocklehurst P. Antibiotics for gonorrhoea in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000098]

Brocklehurst 2013

Brocklehurst P, Gordon A, Heatley E, Milan SJ. Antibiotics for treating bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000262.pub4]

Cotch 1997

Cotch MF, Pastorek JG, Nugent RP, Hillier SL, Gibbs RS, Martin DH, et al. Trichomonas vaginalis associated with low birth weight and preterm delivery. The Vaginal Infections and Prematurity Study Group. Sexually Transmitted Diseases 1997;24(6):361‐2. [MEDLINE: 9243743]

Cox 1989

Cox SM, MacDonald PC, Casey ML. Cytokines and prostaglandins in amniotic fluid of preterm labor pregnancies: decidual origin in response to bacterial toxins(lipopolysaccharide{LPS} and lipotechnoic acid {LTA}. 36th Annual Meeting of the Society for Gynecologic Investigation; 1989 March 16‐16; San Diego, CA. 1989.

Cunningham 1997

Cunningham FG, MacDonald PC, Gant NF, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap LC, Hankins GDV, et al. Williams obstetrics. 20th Edition. Connecticut: Appleton & Lange, 1997.

Cunningham 2001

Cunningham FG, MacDonald PC, Gant NF, Leveno KJ, Gilstrap LC, Hankins GDV, et al. Williams obstetrics. 21st Edition. Connecticut: Appleton & Lange, 2001.

Das 2003

Das A, Ray P, Sharma M, Gopalan S. Rapid diagnosis of vaginal carriage of group B beta haemolytic streptococcus by an enrichment cum antigen detection test. Indian Journal of Medical Research 2003;117:247‐52. [MEDLINE: 14748470]

DeMeo 1996

DeMeo LR, Draper DL, McGregor JA, Moore DF, Peter CR, Kapernick PS, et al. Evaluation of a deoxyribonucleic acid probe for the detection of Trichomonas vaginalis in vaginal secretions. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1996;174(4):1339‐42. [MEDLINE: 8623867]

Domeika 1999

Domeika M, Bassiri M, Butrimiene I, Venalis A, Ranceva J, Vasjanova V. Evaluation of vaginal introital sampling as an alternative approach for the detection of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection in women. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica 1999;78(2):131‐6. [MEDLINE: 10023876]

Doyle 1996

Doyle LW, Ford GW, Olinsky A, Knoches AM, Callanan C. Bronchopulmonary dysplasia and very low birth weight: lung function at 11 years of age. Journal of Pediatrics and Child Health 1996;32:339‐43. [MEDLINE: 8844542]

Elliott 1990

Elliott B, Brunham RC, Laga M, Piot P, Ndinya‐Achola JO, Maitha G, et al. Maternal gonococcal infection as a preventable risk factor for low birth weight. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1990;161(3):531‐6. [MEDLINE: 2313131]

Goldenberg 1998

Goldenberg RL, Rouse DJ. Prevention of premature birth. New England Journal of Medicine 1998;339(5):313‐20. [MEDLINE: 9682045]

GRADE 2014 [Computer program]

McMaster University. GRADEpro. [Computer program on www.gradepro.org]. Version 2014. McMaster University, 2014.

Gravett 1986

Gravett MG, Nelson HP, DeRouen T, Critchlow C, Eschenbach DA, Holmes KK. Independent associations of bacterial vaginosis and chlamydia trachomatis infection with adverse pregnancy outcome. JAMA 1986;256:1899‐905. [MEDLINE: 3761496]

Gülmezoglu 2002

Gülmezoglu AM. Interventions for trichomoniasis in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000220]

Gülmezoglu 2011

Gülmezoglu AM, Azhar M. Interventions for trichomoniasis in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 5. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000220.pub2]

Henriksen 1995

Henriksen TB, Hedegaard M, Secher NS, Wilcox AJ. Standing at work and preterm delivery. British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 1995;102(3):198. [MEDLINE: 7794843]

Higgins 2011

Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane‐handbook.org.

Hillier 1995

Hillier SL, Nugent RP, Eschenbach DA, Krohn MA, Gibbs RS, Martin DH. Association between bacterial vaginosis and preterm delivery of a low‐birth‐weight infant. New England Journal of Medicine 1995;333:1737‐42. [MEDLINE: 7491137]

Holzman 1995

Holzman C, Paneth N, Little R, Pinto‐Martin J. Perinatal brain injury in premature infants born to mothers using alcohol in pregnancy. Pediatrics 1995;95(1):66. [MEDLINE: 7770312]

Jespersen 2005

Jespersen DJ, Flatten KS, Jones MF, Smith TF. Prospective comparison of cell cultures and nucleic acid amplification tests for laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2005;43(10):5324‐6. [MEDLINE: 16208009]

Kleinman 1998

Kleinman S, Busch MP, Hall L, Thomson R, Glynn S, Gallahan D, et al. False‐positive HIV‐1 test results in a low‐risk screening setting of voluntary blood donation. Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study. JAMA 1998;280(12):1080‐5. [MEDLINE: 9757856]

Lettieri 1993

Lettieri L, Vintzileos AM, Rodis JF, Albini SM, Saladia CM. Does idiopathic preterm labor resulting in preterm birth exist?. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1993;168(5):1480‐5. [MEDLINE: 8498431]

Lossick 1991

Lossick JG, Kent HL. Trichomoniasis: trends in diagnosis and management. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1991;165(4 Pt 2):1217‐22. [MEDLINE: 1951578]

Madico 1998

Madico G, Quinn TC, Rompalo A, McKee KT, Gaydos CA. Diagnosis of Trichomonas vaginalis infection by PCR using vaginal swab samples. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1998;36(11):3205‐10. [MEDLINE: 9774566]

Mayta 2000

Mayta H, Gilman RH, Calderon MM, Gottlieb A, Soto G, Tuero I, Sanchez S, et al. 18S ribosomal DNA‐based PCR for diagnosis of Trichomonas vaginalis. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2000;38(7):2683‐7. [MEDLINE: 10878064]

McDonald 1994

McDonald HM, O'Loughin JA, Jolley PT, Vigneswaran R, McDonald PJ. Changes in vaginal flora during pregnancy and association with preterm birth. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1994;170(3):724‐8. [MEDLINE: 8077737]

McFarlin 1995

McFarlin BL, Bottoms SF. Maternal syphilis in Michigan: the challenge to prevent congenital syphilis. Midwifery 1995;11(2):55‐60. [MEDLINE: 7616859]

McGregor 1990

McGregor JA, French JI, Richter R, Franco‐Buff A, Johnson A, Hillier S. Antenatal microbiological maternal risk factors associated with prematurity. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1990;163(5 Pt 1):1465‐73. [MEDLINE: 2240089]

Meis 1995

Meis PJ, Goldenberg RL, Mercer B, Moawad A, Das A, McNellis D, et al. The preterm prediction study: significance of vaginal infections. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal‐Fetal Medicine Units Network. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1995;173(4):1231‐5. [MEDLINE: 7485327]

Muller 2006

Muller I, Brade V, Hagedorn HJ, Straube E, Schorner C, Frosch M, et al. Is serological testing a reliable tool in laboratory diagnosis of syphilis? Meta‐analysis of eight external quality control surveys performed by the german infection serology proficiency testing program. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2006;44(4):1335‐41. [MEDLINE: 16597859]

Muresu 1994

Muresu R, Rubino S, Rizzu P, Baldini A, Colombo M, Cappuccinelli P. A new method for identification of Trichomonas vaginalis by fluorescent DNA in situ hybridization. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1994;32(4):1018‐22. [MEDLINE: 8027304]

Nugent 1991

Nugent RP, Krohn MA, Hillier SL. Reliability of diagnosing bacterial vaginosis is improved by a standardized method of Gram stain interpretation. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1991;29(2):297‐301. [MEDLINE: 1706728]

Papiernik 1986

Papiernik E, Bouyer J, Collin D, Winisdoerffer G, Dreyfus J. Precocious cervical ripening and preterm labor. Obstetrics & Gynecology 1986;67(2):238. [MEDLINE: 3945433]

Petrin 1998

Petrin D, Delgaty K, Bhatt R, Garber G. Clinical and microbiological aspects of Trichomonas vaginalis. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 1998;11(2):300‐17. [MEDLINE: 9564565]

Quinlan 2000

Quinlan JD, Hill DA, Maxwell BD, Boone S, Hoover F, Lense JJ. The necessity of both anorectal and vaginal cultures for group B streptococcus screening during pregnancy. Journal of Family Practice 2000;49(5):447‐8. [MEDLINE: 10836777]

Raynes‐Greenow 2004

Raynes‐Greenow CH, Roberts CL, Bell JC, Peat B, Gilbert GL. Antibiotics for ureaplasma in the vagina in pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2004, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003767.pub2]

Regan 1981

Regan JA, Chao S, James SL. Premature rupture of membranes, preterm delivery, and group B streptococcal colonization of mothers. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1981;141(2):184‐6. [MEDLINE: 7025636]

Rein 1990

Rein MF, Muller M. Trichomonas vaginalis and trichomoniasis. In: Holmes KK, Mardh PA, Sparling PF, Wiesner PJ editor(s). Sexually Transmitted Diseases. McGraw‐Hill, 1990:481‐92.

RevMan 2014 [Computer program]

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.3. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014.

Roberts 2000

Roberts JM. Recent advances: obstetrics. BMJ 2000;321(7252):33‐5.

Roberts 2011

Roberts CL, Rickard K, Kotsiou G, Morris JM. Treatment of asymptomatic vaginal candidiasis in pregnancy to prevent preterm birth: an open‐label pilot randomized controlled trial. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 2011;11:18.

Romero 1992

Romero R, Mazor M, Sepulveda W, Avila C, Copeland D, Williams J. Tumor necrosis factor in preterm and term labor. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1992;166(5):1576‐87. [MEDLINE: 1595815]

Saigal 2000

Saigal S, Hoult LA, Streiner DL, Stoskopf BL, Rosenbaum PL. School difficulties at adolescence in a regional cohort of children who were extremely low birth weight. Pediatrics 2000;105(2):325‐31. [MEDLINE: 10654950]

Satin 1994

Satin AJ, Leveno KJ, Sherman ML, Reedy NJ, Lowe TW. Maternal youth and pregnancy outcomes: middle school versus high school age groups compared to women beyond the teen years. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1994;171(1):184. [MEDLINE: 8030697]

Schunemann 2009

Schunemann HJ. GRADE: from grading the evidence to developing recommendations. A description of the system and a proposal regarding the transferability of the results of clinical research to clinical practice [GRADE: Von der Evidenz zur Empfehlung. Beschreibung des Systems und Losungsbeitrag zur Ubertragbarkeit von Studienergebnissen]. Zeitschrift fur Evidenz, Fortbildung und Qualitat im Gesundheitswesen 2009;103(6):391‐400.

Shrier 2004

Shrier LA, Dean D, Klein E, Harter K, Rice PA. Limitations of screening tests for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in asymptomatic adolescent and young adult women. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2004;190(3):654‐62. [MEDLINE: 15041995]

Temmerman 1994

Temmerman M, Chomba EN, Ndinya‐Achola J, Plummer FA, Coppens M, Piot P. Maternal human immunodeficiency virus‐1 infection and pregnancy outcome. Obstetrics & Gynecology 1994;83(4):495‐501. [MEDLINE: 7907777]

Thies 1994

Thies K, Anders C, Baldus M, Schleiffer T, Weber B, Rabenau H, et al. Detection of primary HIV infection by a second‐generation HIV(p24) antigen test. Infusionstherapie und Transfusionsmedizin 1994;21(5):333‐6. [MEDLINE: 7803996]

Thinkhamrop 2002

Thinkhamrop J, Hofmeyr GJ, Adetoro O, Lumbiganon P. Prophylactic antibiotic administration in pregnancy to prevent infectious morbidity and mortality. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2002, Issue 4. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002250]

Volmink 2007

Volmink J, Siegfried NL, van der Merwe L, Brocklehurst P. Antiretrovirals for reducing the risk of mother‐to‐child transmission of HIV infection. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2007, Issue 1. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003510.pub2]

Walker 2001

Walker GJA. Antibiotics for syphilis diagnosed during pregnancy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2001, Issue 3. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001143]

Watson 2002

Watson EJ, Templeton A, Russell I, Paavonen J, Mardh PA, Stary A, et al. The accuracy and efficacy of screening tests for Chlamydia trachomatis: a systematic review. Journal of Medical Microbiology 2002;51(12):1021‐31. [MEDLINE: 12466399]

Wolner‐Hanssen 1989

Wolner‐Hanssen P, Krieger JN, Stevens CE, Kiviat NB, Koutsky L, Critchlow C, et al. Clinical manifestations of vaginal trichomoniasis. JAMA 1989;261(4):571‐6. [MEDLINE: 2783346]

Wood 2000

Wood NS, Marlow N, Costeloe K, Gibson AT, Wilkinson AR. Neurologic and developmental disability after extremely preterm birth. EPICure Study Group. New England Journal of Medicine 2000;343(6):378‐84. [MEDLINE: 10933736]

Yoon 2000

Yoon BH, Romero R, Park JS, Kim M, Oh SY, Kin CJ. The relationship among inflammatory lesions of the umbilical cord (funisitis), umbilical cord plasma interleukin 6 concentration, amniotic fluid infection, and neonatal sepsis. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2000;183(5):1124‐9. [MEDLINE: 11084553]

Referencias de otras versiones publicadas de esta revisión

Sangkomkamhang 2008

Sangkomkamhang US, Lumbiganon P, Prasertcharoensook W, Laopaiboon M. Antenatal lower genital tract infection screening and treatment programs for preventing preterm delivery. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 2. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006178.pub2]

Characteristics of studies

Characteristics of included studies [ordered by study ID]

Kiss 2004

Methods

Randomised trial with computer‐generated randomisation sequence. All pregnant women presenting for antenatal care were screened, with smear samples sent to the central laboratory where they were randomly assigned to the intervention or control group. Women in the intervention arm with a positive screening result received treatment. Women in the control group were blinded to screening results and received routine antenatal care. Description of withdrawals: yes. Intention‐to‐treat analysis: not used.

Participants

4429 pregnant women (mean age 28.9, SD 5.6) presenting for routine prenatal visits between 15 and 19 weeks' gestation (mean 17, SD 1.6). Intervention group: n = 2058 ; control group: n = 2097. Inclusion criteria: gestational age 15‐19 weeks without subjective complaints (e.g. contractions and vaginal bleeding). Exclusion criteria: clinical symptoms of vaginal infection, multiple pregnancies. Location: Vienna, Austria.

Interventions

Intervention group: vaginal smears (Gram stain and evaluated by the scoring criteria proposed by Nugent 1991) screening for bacterial vaginosis, Trichomonas vaginalis and Candida species and received standard antibiotic treatment if positive screening test, i.e. 2% for 6 days local clindamycin for bacterial vaginosis, 300 mg twice daily for seven days oral clindamycin for recurrent bacterial vaginosis, 0.1 g for 6 days local clotrimazole for candidiasis, and 500 mg for 7 days local metronidazole for trichomoniasis (including treatment of the partner). Control group: were smeared, but the results of testing were not made available to the women's care providers and did not have any effect on the standard clinical antenatal care program routine antenatal examination.

Outcomes

Primary outcome: spontaneous preterm delivery at less than 37 weeks' gestation.

Secondary outcomes:

  1. low birthweight: preterm birth with birthweight below 2500 g;

  2. very low birthweight: preterm birth with birthweight below 1500 g;

  3. rates of miscarriage between 16‐22 and 20‐24 weeks;

  4. intrauterine death;

  5. prevalence of various forms of vaginal infections;

  6. duration of sick leave and hospitalisation.

Notes

4429 randomised, 274 excluded from analysis, 140 lost to follow up, 68 did not fulfill all inclusion criteria, 66 multiple pregnancies.
We have contacted the author and are waiting for a reply for our request for additional data (secondary outcomes e.g. neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis, neonatal sepsis, neonatal death, duration of neonatal admission to NICU/hospital). We will incorporate these additional data in an update to the review, should they be forthcoming.

Risk of bias

Bias

Authors' judgement

Support for judgement

Random sequence generation (selection bias)

Low risk

A pre‐established computer generated randomisation list was used to allocate patients to the treatment groups.

Allocation concealment (selection bias)

Unclear risk

No information on allocation concealment.

Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias)
All outcomes

High risk

All obstetricians and women in the intervention group received their smear results and different treatment regimens.

Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

Not described, but assessors would not have influenced the objective outcome of birthweight.

Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes

Unclear risk

4429 pregnant women: 2058 in the treatment group, 2097 in the control group. There were 274 patients excluded from the study with group allocation not stated (140 lost to follow up, 68 did not fulfill all inclusion criteria, 66 multiple pregnancies).

Intention to treat analysis was not described.

Selective reporting (reporting bias)

Unclear risk

No information available because protocol is not accessible; we have contacted authors for additional outcome data.

Other bias

Low risk

The study seems to be free of other types of bias.

NICU: neonatal intensive care unit
SD: standard deviation

Characteristics of excluded studies [ordered by study ID]

Study

Reason for exclusion

Gjerdingen 2000

Participants did not meet inclusion criteria.
Study compared standard prenatal care including routine inquiry about vaginal symptoms versus standard care supplemented by vaginal pH testing. Both arms had pregnant women who were diagnosed with lower genital tract infection and all participants received vaginal pH screening.
Participants: 121 pregnant women with or without vaginal infection symptoms.
Intervention: vaginal pH testing.
Outcomes: bacterial vaginosis detection rate, preterm deliveries.

Gupta 2013

Participants did not meet inclusion criteria.

Study compared screening for and treatment of abnormal vaginal flora versus no treatment.
Participants: 242 pregnant women with abnormal vaginal flora.
Intervention: screening by vaginal swab for Gram stained and examined for budding yeast cells, pseudohyphae and bacteria of various morphotypes, and scored using the Nugent criteria.
Outcomes: preterm birth.

McGregor 1995

Methods not clearly described, but seems likely that this was not a randomised controlled trial. Described as a prospective observational trial.
Participants: 1260 women.
Intervention: lower genital tract micro‐organism screening (vaginal fluid enzyme; nonspecific protease, sialidase, phospholipase C, phospholipase A2).
Outcomes: preterm birth, early pregnancy loss.

Sungkar 2012

Participants did not meet inclusion criteria.

Study compared self‐examination of vaginal acidity, and microbiologic testing for BV (Gram staining) versus usual prenatal care standard care.
Participants: 176 singleton pregnant women with or without vaginal infection symptoms.
Intervention: education about preterm birth and its risk factors, self‐examination of vaginal acidity, and microbiologic testing for BV (Gram staining).
Outcomes: preterm birth.

Data and analyses

Open in table viewer
Comparison 1. Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Preterm birth less than 37 weeks Show forest plot

1

4155

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.41, 0.75]

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 1 Preterm birth less than 37 weeks.

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 1 Preterm birth less than 37 weeks.

2 Preterm very low birthweight (below or equal 1500 g) Show forest plot

1

4155

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.15, 0.75]

Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 2 Preterm very low birthweight (below or equal 1500 g).

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 2 Preterm very low birthweight (below or equal 1500 g).

3 Preterm low birthweight (below or equal 2500 g) Show forest plot

1

4155

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.34, 0.66]

Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 3 Preterm low birthweight (below or equal 2500 g).

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 3 Preterm low birthweight (below or equal 2500 g).

4 Neonatal morbidity

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Duration of admission to neonatal intensive care unit/hospital

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Neonatal death

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Side‐effects of treatment (including drug resistance)

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 Persistent infection

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 Recurrent infection

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Women's satisfaction

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
Figuras y tablas -
Figure 1

Risk of bias summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 1 Preterm birth less than 37 weeks.
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 1 Preterm birth less than 37 weeks.

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 2 Preterm very low birthweight (below or equal 1500 g).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.2

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 2 Preterm very low birthweight (below or equal 1500 g).

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 3 Preterm low birthweight (below or equal 2500 g).
Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.3

Comparison 1 Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening, Outcome 3 Preterm low birthweight (below or equal 2500 g).

Summary of findings for the main comparison. Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening for preventing preterm delivery

Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening for preventing preterm delivery

Patient or population: pregnant women presenting for routine prenatal care
Settings: Vienna, Austria
Intervention: lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening

Outcomes

Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI)

Relative effect
(95% CI)

No of Participants
(studies)

Quality of the evidence
(GRADE)

Comments

Assumed risk

Corresponding risk

No screening

Lower genital tract infection screening

Preterm birth less than 37 weeks

Study population

RR 0.55
(0.41 to 0.75)

4155
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1

53 per 1000

29 per 1000
(22 to 40)

Preterm low birthweight (below or equal 2500 g)

Study population

RR 0.48
(0.34 to 0.66)

4155
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1

51 per 1000

24 per 1000
(17 to 34)

Preterm very low birthweight (below or equal 1500 g)

Study population

RR 0.34
(0.15 to 0.75)

4155
(1 study)

⊕⊕⊕⊝
moderate1

11 per 1000

4 per 1000
(2 to 9)

*The basis for the assumed risk is the median control group risk across studies. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk ratio

GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate.

1 One study with design limitations.

Figuras y tablas -
Summary of findings for the main comparison. Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening for preventing preterm delivery
Comparison 1. Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Preterm birth less than 37 weeks Show forest plot

1

4155

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.55 [0.41, 0.75]

2 Preterm very low birthweight (below or equal 1500 g) Show forest plot

1

4155

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.34 [0.15, 0.75]

3 Preterm low birthweight (below or equal 2500 g) Show forest plot

1

4155

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.48 [0.34, 0.66]

4 Neonatal morbidity

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

5 Duration of admission to neonatal intensive care unit/hospital

0

0

Mean Difference (IV, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

6 Neonatal death

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

7 Side‐effects of treatment (including drug resistance)

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

8 Persistent infection

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

9 Recurrent infection

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

10 Women's satisfaction

0

0

Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)

0.0 [0.0, 0.0]

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Lower genital tract infection screening versus no screening