Introduction. Our study aims to investigate and evaluate (1) rates of success of ECV for breech presentation at term at the Royal Women's Hospital in comparison to international standards; (2) mode of delivery following ECV; (3) factors influencing success rates of ECV at the Royal Women's Hospital. Methods. An audit of all women who underwent ECV between the years 2007 and 2014 at the Royal Women's Hospital as public patients was completed. Data parameters were collected from paper and electronic patient files at the Women's Hospital. Data was collected to analyse the effect of the following parameters on ECV success and birth outcome: age, parity, gestational age, BMI, AFI, and tocolytic use. These parameters were analysed to determine their effect on ECV outcome and birth outcome. Results. The Women's Hospital, Melbourne, has an ECV success rate of approximately 37%. Of the patients undergoing ECV, 29% proceeded to normal vaginal delivery. Predictors of successful ECV included low BMI, multiparity, and AFI more than 16 (P < 0.05). The only predictor of cephalic vaginal delivery following ECV was multiparity. Negative predictors of cephalic delivery were low AFI and nulliparity. Conclusions. The success rate of ECV at the Women's Hospital, Melbourne, is in line with global standards.
PurposeThis study aims to assess the microbiological profile, antimicrobial susceptibility and adequacy of intravenous ceftriaxone and metronidazole as empirical therapy for surgical patients presenting with complicated intra-abdominal infection.MethodsThis retrospective audit reviews the microbiological profile and sensitivity of intra-abdominal cultures from adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection who presented to the emergency department at Western Health (Melbourne, Australia) between November 2013 and June 2017. Using the hospital’s database, an audit was completed using diagnosis related group (DRG) coded data. Ethics approval has been granted by the Western Health Human Research Ethics Committee. Results are stratified according to surgical conditions (appendicitis, cholecystitis, sigmoid diverticulitis and bowel perforation). The antimicrobial coverage of ceftriaxone and metronidazole is evaluated against these microbial profiles.ResultsA total of 1,412 patients were identified using DRG codes for intra-abdominal infection. All patients with microscopy and sensitivity results were included in the study. Patients without these results were excluded. 162 patients were evaluable. 180 microbiological cultures were performed through surgical intervention or radiologically guided aspiration of the intra-abdominal infection. Single or multiple pathogens were identified in 137 cultures. The most commonly identified pathogens were mixed anaerobes (12.6%), Escherichia coli (E. coli) (12.1%), mixed coliforms (11.6%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (7%). Other common pathogens (6% each) included Enterococcus faecalis, Streptococcus anginosus, Vancomycin-resistant Enterococci (VRE) and Extended Spectrum Beta-Lactamases (ESBL) producing E. coli. Organisms isolated in our study are consistent with existing literature. However, a significant proportion of antibiotic resistant organisms was identified in cases of perforated bowel and sigmoid diverticulitis. Broader spectrum antimicrobial therapy should therefore be considered in lieu of ceftriaxone and metronidazole in these cases. Ceftriaxone and metronidazole remain as appropriate empirical therapy for patients who presented with perforated appendicitis and cholecystitis.DiscussionThe empirical regime of ceftriaxone and metronidazole remains appropriate for intra-abdominal infection secondary to appendicitis and cholecystitis. In cases involving perforated small and large bowel, including complicated sigmoid diverticulitis, the judicious use of ceftriaxone and metronidazole is recommended.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.